APHC010384232025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 7845& 7137 of 2025 Crl.P.No.7845 of 2025 Between: GEMMELI PRASAD RAO, S/O BONJANNA AGE 48 YEARS R/ O PUTTUR VILLAGE, LAXMI PANCHAYAT, PEDDABAILLU MANDAL ALLURI SITARAMA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Station House officer, Pendurthi Station, Visakhapatnam Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAMINENI SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Crl.P.No.7137 of 2025 Between: 1. ARLABU MATYALINGAM, S/O RAJANNA AGE 35 YEARSM R/O D.NO. 2-52, KILUMULU VILLAGE, PENDABAYALU MANDAL, ASR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 2 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. RAMINENI SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: These two petitions are heard and disposed of by this common order as they arise out of one crime. The Criminal Petitions 7845 and 7137of 2025 have been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’)/ Sections 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 4 respectively on bail in Crime No.296 of 2025 of Pendurthi Police Station, Visakhapatnam District registered against the petitioners/Accused No. 3 and 4 herein for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.06.2025 at 18.30 hours on receipt of credible information about illegal possession and transportation of ganja, the Sub Inspector of Police, Pendurthi Police Station along with his staff and mediators reached to Saripalli Flyover bridge and found four 3 persons standing under the flyover. The police caught hold of them and on interrogation, they confessed that they are transporting liquid ganja. The police seized 1.6 Kgs of liquid ganja from the possession of the accused under the cover of a mediators’ report and registered an FIR. During the investigation, the accused were apprehended and remanded to judicial custody on 25.06.2025. 3. Mr.Ramineni Sudheer, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 4 are permanent residents of Kilumulu Village of Pendabayalu Mandal, ASR District and undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners were arrested on 25.06.2025 and since then they have been in the judicial custody for allegedly indulged in 1.6 Kgs of liquid ganja of transportation and possession and it is urged to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 4 on bail. 4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently argued that the ganja involved in this case is liquid ganja of 1.6 Kgs which is a commercial quantity. Investigation is not yet completed and some more material witnesses have to be examined and it is urged to dismiss the petitions. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 4 6. As seen from the record, Accused Nos.3 and 4 were found allegedly in indulging 1.6 Kgs of liquid ganja. They were arrested on 25.06.2025 and since then they have been in judicial custody. The seized ganja is undoubtedly a commercial quantity. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners. On careful perusal of the entire material on record, this Court is not satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners are not guilty of such offence and that they are not likely to commit any offence if they are enlarged on bail. Hence, there are no merits in the petitions. 7. Accordingly, both the Criminal Petitions are dismissed as the petitioners are not entitled for grant of bail at this juncture. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:18.08.2025 KA 5 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION Nos: 7845 & 7137 of 2025 Date: 18.08.2025 KA