APHC010423532025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8515/2025 Between: 1. VANAPARTHI BAPIRAJU, S/O. CHANTIBABU, A/32 YEARS, C/PERIKI, P AGRAHARAM VILLAGE,THONDANGI M, KAKINADA DISTRICT, N/R PATA VOORU, MALLEPALLI V,GANDEPALLI M, KAKINADA DISTRICT 2. RAGHU, S/O THIRUSELVAM, A/32, C/DEVAR, NAKKEERAN STREET, MOGAPPAIR EAST TIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, TAMILNADU STATE ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through the Station House Officer, Jaggampeta PS, East Godavari District, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High court of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. DUGGIRALA SUBASH Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners- accused Nos. 1 and 5 on bail in crime No. 46 of 2025 of Jaggampeta Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Case of the prosecution is that on 04-03-2025 at 2.30 p.m., on receipt of credible information regarding illegal possession and transportation of Ganja, the Sub Inspector of Police along with his staff and mediators rushed to plot No. 1596, Jagananna Colony, Jaggampeta Village, and found eight persons in suspicious circumstances. On seeing the police, the said eight persons tried to escape. Then, the police apprehended them and on enquiry, they disclosed their identity particulars and the police found 492 K.Gs. of Ganja in their possession. The police seized the contraband, arrested the accused and remanded them to judicial custody. 3. Sri Duggirala Subash, learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that the petitioners are innocents of the alleged offence and have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the sole earning members of their families, and, therefore, their continued incarceration would cause undue hardship to their dependents. The petitioners undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of 3 the foregoing, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, Ms. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 6. As seen from the record, the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 5 were allegedly dealing with 492 K.Gs. of Ganja. Undoubtedly, it is a commercial quantity and colossal one. This is the second bail application filed by the petitioners. The allegation against the petitioners-accused Nos. 1 and 5 is that accused No. 1 supplied Ganja to local traders. Accused No. 5, being resident of Tamil Nadu State, supplied Ganja to local traders of Tamil Nadu State. The alleged colossal quantity of Ganja was found in the house of the petitioner-accused No. 1. He was spot arrested. He has got one adverse antecedent under the provisions of ‘the NDPS Act’. Hence, the request of learned counsel for the petitioner-accused No. 1 is not found convincing and 4 reasonable at this juncture. Hence, the criminal petition against the petitioner- accused No. 1 is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed. 7. Insofar as the petitioner-accused No. 5 is concerned, there are no adverse antecedents reported against him. Charge sheet in this case has already been filed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner- accused No. 5, this Court is inclined to enlarge him on bail with the following stringent conditions: (i) The petitioner-accused No. 5 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of learned I Additional Sessions Judge at Rajamahendravaram; (ii) The petitioner-accused No. 5 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every Saturday in between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. till cognizance is taken by learned trial Court; (iii) The petitioner-accused No. 5 shall not leave the limits of the district without prior permission from the investigating officer; (iv) The petitioner-accused No. 5 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future; (v) The petitioner-accused No. 5 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with 5 the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court during the trial; and (vi) The petitioner-accused No. 5 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the investigating officer. 8. The criminal petition is accordingly partly allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 28.08.2025 JSK 6 THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8515 OF 2025 Date: 28.08.2025 JSK