APHC010466852025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 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 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA Officer, Jaggampeta PS, East Godavari District, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High court of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. DUGGIRALA SUBASH Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following The Criminal Petition ha Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No Police Station, East Godavari District, registered Petitioner/Accused No.1herein for the offences punishable under Section 8 (c) IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9265 OF 2025 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 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 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: DUGGIRALA SUBASH Respondent/complainant: 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’ etitioner/Accused No.1 bail in Cr.No.46 of 2025 of Jaggampeta Police Station, East Godavari District, registered herein for the offences punishable under Section 8 (c) IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3521] THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO 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, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED PRADESH, through the Station House Officer, Jaggampeta PS, East Godavari District, Represented by Public ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS’), seeking to bail in Cr.No.46 of 2025 of Jaggampeta Police Station, East Godavari District, registered against the 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’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 04.03.2025 at 02.30 P.M., on receipt of credible information regarding illegal possession and transportation of Ganja, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Jaggampeta Police Station, 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 KGs of Ganja in their possession. The police seized the contraband, arrested the accused and remanded them to judicial custody. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri Duggirala Subash, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking him to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the Petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioner. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner has a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioner has cooperated with the investigation thus far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant further custodial detention, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, Petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the Petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms. P.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor strenuously opposed the grant of bail and prosecution further apprehends that the Petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the progress of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner does not deserve the discretionary relief of bailand it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 8. As seen from the record, the Petitioner/Accused No.1 was allegedly indulged in dealing with 492 kgs of ganja, which is not only a commercial quantity but also a colossal quantity. The Petitioner has been arrested on 04.03.2025. The Petitioner has been in judicial custody for the past 194 days. After thorough investigation in this case, charge sheet has already been filed. This Court vide order dated 01.09.2025 enlarged the Accused Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 7 in Criminal Petition Nos. 7760, 7761, 7765 and 7766 of 2025. Hence, rigor of Section 36(A)(4) and Section 37 of ‘the NDPS Act’, would not attract. It takes considerable length of time for taking up the case for trial before the learned Trial Court. Keeping the petitioner until such indefinite period in the judicial custody is neither found convincing nor reasonable. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 is a Pata Vooru, Mallepalli Village, Gandepalli Mandal, Kakinada District. 9. Considering the period of detention undergone by the Petitioner/Accused No.1in judicial custody for the past 194 days, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner, and his alleged role played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused No.1shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-Cum- Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Peddapuram. ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1shall appear before the learned the Trial Court on each and every adjournment without fail. iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused No.1shall 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; and vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.1shall 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. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition isallowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 18.09.2025 KK THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9265 OF 2025 18.09.2025 KK