APHC010492962025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9090/2025 Between: Golla Karthik and another ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 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 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 on bail in Crime No.218 of 2025 on the file of Visakhapatnam Railway Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 herein for the offence 2 punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the case of the prosecution are that on 17.06.2025 on credible information about illegal transportation of ganja, the Inspector of Police along with staff and mediators rushed to Pillar No.32, PF No.1, Near Gate No.03 of Visakhapatnam Railway Station and found the accused along with 21.8 kgs of ganja. Then the police arrested accused and seized 21.8 kgs of ganja from them. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri G.Maheswara Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 submits that the Petitioners are innocents and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there is no prima facie material or cogent evidence connecting the Petitioners to the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the Petitioners are the sole earning members of their families and that their incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to their dependents. The Petitioners undertakes to comply with any condition that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to impose while considering the prayer for grant of bail. 3 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioners are permanent residents of Upper Sileru Village, G.K.Veedhi Mandal, Alluri Sitharama Raju District and there exists no apprehension of their absconding or evading the due process of law. The Petitioners have extended full cooperation in the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in all future proceedings. It is also urged that the nature of the allegations does not necessitate custodial interrogation, and that the imposition of appropriate conditions would suffice to secure the ends of justice. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners have been in judicial custody for the past 112 days. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms.P. Akila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioners on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigative process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioners. The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released, the Petitioners may exert undue influence upon, or intimidate, prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiating the 4 evidentiary foundation of the case. It is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the Petitioners absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. In view of the gravity and allegations, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioners are not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In view of the rival submissions advanced by both the learned Counsel and upon a perusal of the prosecutorial narrative, the pivotal issue now meriting for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 8. As seen from the record, the allegations against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 are that they were individually and separately found in possession of 8 kgs and 13 kgs of ganja respectively. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that inventory was completed and it is 21 kgs of ganja. As seen from the record, alleged possession of ganja from the petitioners individually, it is not a commercial quantity. Section 29 of ‘the NDPS Act’ would also not applicable. The petitioners were arrested on 5 17.06.2025. They have been in the judicial custody for the past 112 days. So far eight witnesses are examined. Thus the substantial portion of the investigation in so far the involvements of the petitioners are concerned is completed. The petitioners are permanent residents of Upper Sileru Village, G.K.Veedhi Mandal, Alluri Sitharama Raju District. The petitioners have got fixed abode. The period of custodial interrogation is completed. All the witnesses are official witnesses. Therefore, the question of petitioners threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation or tampering the evidence may not arise. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioners, their alleged roles played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to they executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the I Additional District & Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam. 6 ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 5 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 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. vii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they do not have a passport, they shall submit an affidavits to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J 7 Date: 06.10.2025 S D P 8 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.9090 of 2025 Date:06.10.2025 S D P