APHC010429702025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] SATURDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8616/2025 Between: Devara Kalyan ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Crime No.248 of 2025 of Kancharlapalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, registered for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) r/w 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’). 2 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 16.07.2025 at 12.00 hours, near Nirman Park Railway Track, Behind KV School, Kancharapalem, Visakhapatnam City, on credible information about illegal possession of ganja, the Sub Inspector of Police along with his staff and mediators found the accused in possession of 2.050 kgs of ganja (2050 grams). Thereafter, the contraband was seized under a cover of mediatornama and the accused were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 4. Mr. G.Maheswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; petitioner was falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioner is the sole breadwinner; petitioner would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the petitioner is the habitual offender, some more material witnesses has to be examined; investigation is not completed; if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he would not be available for the investigation and he would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 3 6. The petitioner/A1 was allegedly indulged in dealing with 2 kilograms of ganja. It is not a commercial quantity. There is no adverse or incriminating antecedent against the petitioner. He was arrested on 16.07.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 44 days. Although the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has three antecedents, two pertaining to offences under ‘the NDPS Act’, and one under the IPC and that he was arrested at the spot along with the contraband, the present case does not involve the seizure of a commercial quantity of ganja. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Gnanapuram Village, Visakhapatnam. As substantial portion of the investigation has been completed and all the witnesses are official witnesses, the possibility of the petitioner threatening the witnesses, hampering the investigation, or tampering with the evidence may not arise. 7. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations made against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention already undergone by him, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District & Sessions 4 Judge-cum-Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam. ii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 30.08.2025 S D P 5 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8616 of 2025 Date:30.08.2025 S D P