APHC010483192025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9495/2025 Between: 1. ABDULA HAMEED BASHA, S/O. BASHA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O. VAMBAY APARTMENTS, LINGAMPETA, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT PAPPULA STREET, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. 2. KAPA CHANTI,, S/O. BHASKARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O. VADALI VILLAGE, PENUGONDA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P., PRESENTLY RESIDING AT PAPPULA STREET, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. VENKATA LAKSHMI GAYATRI YANAMANDRA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This criminal petition has been filed, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners- accused Nos. 4 and 5 on bail in crime No. 307 of 2025 of Rajahmundry III Town Police Station, East Godavari District,registered for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20 (b) (ii) (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS Act'). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. On 15-07-2025 at about 9 a.m., near underpass bridge, fort gate, Rajamahendravaram, accused Nos. 1 to 6 were found and arrested while they were in possession of 10.294 K.Gs. of Ganja. CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Smt. Venkata Lakshmi Gayatri Yanamandra, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are innocentsand have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime.It is contended that the petitionersarethe sole breadwinnersoftheir families and their arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioners. The petitioners undertaketo abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the petitioners. 4. It is further submitted that the petitioners havepermanent place of residence and there is no likelihood ofthem absconding or evading the process of law.The petitioners havecooperated with the investigation so far 3 and assurecontinued 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 petitionerswould not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Sri NeelothpalGanji, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses yet to be examined.It is submitted that enlargement of the petitionerson 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 petitionersabsconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the petitioners donot deserve the discretionary relief of bailand 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. In 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 petitioners are entitled for grant of bail?” 4 ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5, as seen from the record, is that they had indulged in possession and transportation of 10.294 K.Gs. of Ganja along with other accused. The petitioners were arrested on 15-07-2025. They have been in judicial custody for the past 73 days. The petitioners are permanent residents of Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. They have got fixed abode. So far, 12 witnesses are examined. Substantial portion of investigation, insofar as the role of the petitioners is concerned, is completed. Period for custodial interrogation is also completed. If the petitioners are enlarged on bail, no prejudice would be caused to the investigation. Since all the witnesses are official witnesses, chances for the petitioners either to threaten the witnesses or tamper the evidence or hamper the investigation may not arise. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to enlarge them on bail with the following stringent conditions: (i) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing each a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of learned V Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Rajamahendravaram; 5 (ii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 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 Court; (iii) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future; (iv) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 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; (v) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 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; and (vi) The petitioners-accused Nos. 4 and 5 shall surrender their passports, if any, to the investigating officer. If they claim that they donot have passport, they shall submit affidavits to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. The criminal petition is accordingly allowed. _______________________ Dr.Y.LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date:25-09-2025, JSK 6 HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE Y.LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9495 OF 2025 DATE: 25-09-2025 JSK