i lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE .-PRESENT: TgivHEIHONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9359 OF 2025 , `1T+ [3521 I Betwee n : DwarapudI- Gopi Salt, S/o. Venkata Ramana, aged about 28 years, R/o. D.No.32-8-ll/29, Near Ayyappa Swamy Temple, Bandaru Towers, Harijana Jaggayyapalem, sheelanagar, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District, A.P. ,~ PetI-tiOner/Accused No.1 AND The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep by its public prosecutor, High Court ofAndhrapradesh. r Respondent Petition under sectI-OnS 480 & 483 of BNSS (old Sections 437 & 439 of cr.p.c), praying that in the circumstances stated in the affI-daVI't flled in support of the crimI'nal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on baI`I pending disposal of crime No.327/2025 of \ Gajuwaka p.s., visakhapatnam District. pe/ The petI-lion coming on for hearI-ng, upon PeruSI-ng the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri PULAPALLI BABJI, Advocate for the petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the court made the following; ``. ._ _ \_ i Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9359 of 2025 Dated 16.09.2O25 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 fthe Cr.P.C.I)/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity tthe BNSS]), seek-lng to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1 on. bail in Cr.No.327 of 2025 of Gajuwaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam commissionerate, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for the offences punishable under section 22(b) read with 8 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity [{he NDPS Act'). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. On 31.07.2025, at about 10:30 hours, in the bushes near STBL, Sheelanagar, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam City, and reported at 12:15 hours, on receipt of reliable information through CTF regarding possession of MDMA drug powder, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Gajuwaka Police Station, along with staff and mediators, conducted a raid at the said location and apprehended the accused, Dwarapudi Gopi Sai, S/o Venkata Ramana, aged 23 years, Kapu by caste, R/o D.No.32-8-ll/29, near Ayyappa Swamy Temple, Bandarulovas, Harijana Jaggayyapalam. On search, the police seizecI 4 grams of MDMA drug powder, one Viva Android cellphone, one samsung Tab, and cash of Rs.1,000/-from his possession under the cover / =r- ------z---,--------7 . -.i_ .i-,I,`.i,, i--?i:-_-i-, =t` • fl`d- / 3 Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9359 of 2025 Dated 16.09.2025 of a mediators' report. The'reafter, the police seized the contraband, arrested the accused, and remanded him to judicial custody. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri Pulapalli Babji, learned counsel forthe petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and hI'S arrest WOuld cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the petitioner. 4. lt is further submitted that the petitioner has permanent P£lace of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of'law. The petitioner has -cooperated with the investigation thus I far and assures continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant custodial interrogation, and if any condition is imposed while granting the bail, the petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per confra, Ms.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is tr£= :j}- 4 Dr. YLR, J crI.P.No.9359 of 2O25 Dated 16_09.2025 still underway and several material witnesses are yet to be examined. lt is submitted that enlargement of the pet'ltioner on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non- .cooperation from the petitioner. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioner, if released, may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. lt is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the petitioners abscond'lng and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the investigation, it js submitted that the petitioner does not deserve the discretionary re[jef of bail and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. ln the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both sides, now the point for consideration is: "whether the petitioner/Accused No.1 is entitled for grant of bail?"; ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.1 is that he indulged in dealing with 4 Grams of MDMA, which is not a commercial '''. _ . --I_T=f§ / 5 Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9359 of 2025 Dated 16.09.2025 quantity. He was arrested on 31.07.2025. He has been in judicial Custody for the past 48 days. Although the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are 4 cases registered against him, the petitioner/Accused No.1 is-presumed to be innocent till the guilt iS Proved. ln prabhakar Tiwari v. State of U.P. and others1, the Honlble A\pex Court has categorically held that criminal antecedents Should not be taken into consideration wh-l]e cons-ldering the application for grant of bail. The petitioner/Accused No.1 is permanent resident Of Gajuwaka, visakhapatnam. Material portion of the investigation iS complete.d. All the important witnesses are examined. All the witnesses are Official Witnesses. Therefore, the chances Of the Petitioner threatening the Witnesses Or tampering the evidence or hampering the investigation would not arise. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the facts and Circumstances Of the Case and the nature and grav-lty of allegations levelled against the Petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/A-ccused No.1 on bail with `the following stringent conditions: (i) The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of 1 2020 (ll) SCC 648 \ __i 6 Dr_ YLR, J CrI.P.No.9359 of 2025 Dated 16.09.2025 Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand' only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of learned Ill Additional Chief Judilcial Magistrate at Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam; I(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 learned trial Couit; (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 viith 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 dr indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as s_rri-A 7 Dr. YLR, J CrI.P.No.9359 of 2025 Dated 16.O9.2025 to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and (vii) The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. lf he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed. SD/- K. KASiRAO A`?,HAR! //TRUE COPY// ASS]SI AN±alHRE GIS IDAR SECllON OFFICE R r` To, 1. The I Additional District & sessions Judge-SpecI-aI Judge for Trl-al of offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam, visakhapatnam District. 2. The Ill Additional Chief JudicI-al Magistrate at GaJ-uWaka. 3. The Superintendent, central Jail, Visakhapatnam, vI-SakhaPatnam District. 4. The Station House officer, Gajuwaka p.s., visakhapatnam District 5. One CC to SRI. PULAPALLI BABJI Advocate [opuc] 6. Two CCs to PublI'C Prosecutor, High Court ofAP [OUT] 7. One spare copy OKJ ---,-.,,_JF_+ \ HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATE D : 16/09/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9359 of 2025 ALLOWED