1 [3521] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RA& CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9386 OF 2025 rA\ •- ' '‘-Vz f ■' A, I uv ‘i •: / 'I "Rz. Between: 1. Shaik Basheer, S/o Khadhar Basha, Aged about 25 Years, Muslim, R/o D.No. 89-17-1, Opp: Swimming Pool, Morampudi, Rajamahendravaram Rural. 2. Eepparthi Lakky @ Lakky Babu, S/o Ganga Raju, Aged about 22 Yrs, D.NO. 12-56, Church Street, Jaihind Nagar, Hukumpeta Panchyath Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal, Now resident of Electrical Office, Hukumpeta, Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal j Petitioner/Accused A1 and A2 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Amaravati, through Station House officer, Bommuru Police Station Rajahmahendravaram Respondent Petition under Section 48o & 483 of BNSS is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioners i.e A.1 and A. 2 on Regular bail in Crime No.207 OF 2025 Bommuru Police Station Rajahmahendravaram, East Godavari District Dated: 19-06-2025. The petition/Appeal coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri B.SUDHAKAR KUMAR Advocate for the Petitioner,/ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the Court made the following. j j 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 No.1 and 2 on bail in Crime No.207 of 2025 East Godavari District for the offence punishabie under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS of Bommuru Police Station, Rajamahendravaram registered against the Petitioners/Accused No. 1 and 2 herein Act’). CASE OF THE PROSECtJTinM- 2. Material averments stemming from the 19.06.2025 at about 11.00 a. with mediators conducted raid at Hukumpeta Panchayat, Rajamahendravaram prosecution are that m the Sub Inspector of Police, bommuru along a vacant place behind Jana Chaitanya Arch, Rural and apprehended the AcyCjsed No.1 to 5, while they were in possession of 4 Kgs of Ganja in a polythene cover and the vehicle under cover of mediators report. on same was seized along with mobile phone and CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITinMFP- 3. Sri B. Sudhakar Kumar, learned Counsel for the Petitioners the Petitioners submits that are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking them crime. It is contended that the Petitioners respective family and their arrest would to the commission of the are the sole bread winners of their cause undue hardship and prejudice to his .dependents. The Petitioners undertake to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioners. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioners have a permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of law. The Petitioners have cooperated with the investigation so 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, Petitioners 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, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the Petitioners on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non-cooperation from the Petitioners. The prosecution further apprehends that the Petitioners, 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 Petitioners 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 Petitioners do 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 POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: record. 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration i "Whether the Petitioners are entitled for grant of bail?” contentions of the is; ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the Petitioners/ Accused No.1 and 2, as seen is that they had allegedly indulged in possession and from the record transportation of 4 Kgs of ganja along with the assistance of other Accused. The Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 were arrested on 19.06.2025. They have been in judicial custody since then. The Petitioners/ Accused No.1 and 2 are permanent residents of Morampudi and Hukumpeta Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal, East Godavari Panchayat of District respectively.- This 11.08.2025 granted bail to Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor Court in Criminal Petition No. 7782 of 2025, dated the Petitioners/ Accused 3 and 5. submits that there are three adverse antecedents recorded Accused No.1 and two against Accused No.2 against the they are relating to the iRc Offences. 9- The petitioners shall be presumed to be innocent until the guilty is proved. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Prabhakar Tewari v. State of Uttar Pradesh^ at para No.7 observed that criminal similar adverse cannot be basis for refusal of bail. CONCLUSION: antecedents 10. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the Petitioners, their alleged role 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 No.1 and 2 shall be enlarged bail subject to their 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 VI Additional Judicial on Magistrate of First Class, Rajamahendravaram. ii. The Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 shall appear before the Station House Officer, Bommuru Police Station 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 No.1 and 2 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. The Petitioners/Accused No.1 and 2 shall not commit indulge in commission of any offence in future. IV. or (2020) 11 see 648 V. The Petitioners/Accused No.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 No.1 and 2 shall not, directly 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 No.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 affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. or 11. SDI- G.HELANAIDU ASSISTANTIREGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// F To, 1. The e**" Additional Judicial Magistratse of First Class, Rajamahendravaram. 2. The Superintendent, central Prison, Rajamahendravaram. 3. The Station House officer Bommuru Police Station Rajahmahendravaram 4. One CC to SRI. B.SUDHAKAR KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor (AP) High Court of A.P., Amaravati [OUT]. 6. One spare copy HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED: 17/09/2025 BAIL ORDER \ CRLP.No.9386 of 2025 ALLOWED ■■ !