lib IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMAR Jr, FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY {€iTjgJg TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHE ? Between CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9827 OF 2024 Suraj Kumar, S/o Sanjay Chowdary, Aged 29 years, R/O Gondpurtola, Baikatpur, patna, Bihar State. ...Petitioner/AccusecI AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its public prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Through its s.H.O, GRP Police Station, Visakhapatnam. ...Respondent/Complainant Petition under section 483(1 ) of Cr.P.C & Under Section 484 of BNSS, l's filed praying that in the circumstances stated I'n the memorandum Of grounds filed I-n Support Of the Criminal Petl-lion, the Hl-gh Court may be pleased to relax the condition in para No.7 on execution of personal bond fortL Rs.50,000/- to Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties order made jn Crl.M.P.No.1622/2024 on the file of the court of the I Additl-onal District and Sessions Judge Special Judge for Try the Offences under NDPS Act at Visakhapatnam, dated 29-07-2024 The Petl'tion coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the memorandum of grounds filed lan support thereof and upon hear,'ng the' arguments of SRI PANGI RAJU BABU, Advocate for the petitioner, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent, the coun made the following THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CRIMINAL PETITION No.9827 of 2024 ORDER: The instant criminal petition is filed under Section 483 (A) of Cr.P.C and Section 484 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha (in short tBNSS') on behalf of the petitioner/A1, seeking to relax the condition imposed vide order dated 29.07.2024 in CrI.M.P No.1622 of 2024 on the file of I Addl. District & Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of Offences Under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam, in connection with Crime No.1622 of 2024 of GRP Police Station, Visakhapatnam. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. Perused the material available on record. 4. The petitioner/Al is an accused in Crime No.1622 of 2024 of GRP Police Station, Visakhapatnam, registered for offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) read with 8(c) of NDPS Act. 5. a The petitioner/Al is granted bail by an order dated 29.07.2024 in Cr.M.P No.9827 of 2024 on the file of I Addl. Distr'lct & Sessions Judge- Special Judge for Tr'lal of Offences Under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam. The relevant portion of the said order reads as follows:- ` if-Fi` `=-``g ft7. In the result, the petition js allowed and the Petitioner/Al is ordered to be released on baI®l On their execution of personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the court of vl Metropolitan Magistrate (for Railways), Visakhapatnam and on such release, the petitioner/AI shall appear before the station House officer, GRP Poll-Ce Station twice l'n a month I'.e., On lst day and 15th day between 10:00 AM and ll :00 AM for a perl'od of one year. In case the petI-tl®Oner/Al fal-led to comply the conditions I-mPOSed by this Court, the statI'On House Officer, GRP P.S. shall inform the non-compliance of the condition to this Court wl'thout fail. The sureties must be local persons." Apparently, the state has not challenged the above said orders. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner is eking out his livelihood by doing cooll-e works, it is very difficult for him to I secure suretl®es so as to execute a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-., which is the condition precedent to release him, despite obtaining the baI'I order and the petitioner I-s forced to remain in jail. Thus, the present criminal petition. 7. The role of sureties plays a pivotal role l'n criminal jurisprudence and they act as guarantors for the accused in ensuring their compliance with the bail conditl'ons and their presence before the concerned court as and when required. sureties balance the right of the accused with the I-ntereSt Of J'uStiCe and public safety. ln the absence of requI-red sureties EiE Q ri------. leads to multifarious problems to the accused as well as other stake holders. 8. lt is apttO mention thatWay back in 1970's 'ltself, the Apex Court -ln Gudikanti Narsimhulu Vs. High Court of A.P1, wherejln, lit ~ls categorically opined that llHeavy bail from poor man iS Obviously Wrong. poverty is society's malady and sympathy, not sternness, is the judicial response". 9. Thus, a pragmatic and PurPOS®lVe import Squarely Serves the purpose of ensuring the principle as tBa'Il iS the Rule and Jail 'ls an Exception' and also another golden rule iS IExcessive Bail is no Bail'. Recently, the said legal Pr'InCiPleSWere followed by the Hon'ble Supreme court-ln Jalaluddin Khan Vs. union of lndia2 and -ln Girish Gandh-I Vs. state of Nladhya Pradesh3 . 10. Therefore, in v'IeW Of the above Well Settled legal position, COuPled 'with the vistas of Article 21 of the Constitution Of India andmOre SO, keeping in view the financ'lal capacity of the petitioner as he claims to be from a poor background, this court -ls of the considered opinion to reduce/relax the personal bond amount from Rs.50,000/-to Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of the vl Metropolitan Mag'IStrate (for Ra'llways), 1 (1978) 1 SCC 240 2 (2024) Livelaw SC 571 3 (2024) 10 SCC 674 - visakhapatnam. lt is made clear that the othefoail conditI-OnS Shall remain unaltered. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. //TRUE COPY// sD/-B.CHJTTI JOSEPH A SsS:ScTT:ONaeA R `To, Fl ---.-.,I.I. I`--I-I.`_l` 1. The I AddltionaI District & sessl'ons Judge-Gum-specl-aI Judge for Tra" of offences under NDPS Act, at visakhapatnam, visakhapatnam Distrl'ct 2. The vI Metropolitan Magl-strate (for Rallways), vI'Sakhapatnam, VIsakhapatnam District 3. The superintendent, central prI'SOn, Vl'sakhapatnam, v,'sakhapatnam District 4. The slat,-on House officer, GRP PoI,ce station, vl'sakhapatnam, Vl'sakhapatnam Dl'strjct 5. One cc to SRI. PANGI RAJU BABU, Advocate [opuc] 6. Two cos to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, Hl'gh court of Andhra pradesh t [OUT] 7. One spare copy PSR HIGH COURT MRK,J DATED..17/01/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9827 of 2024 ALLOWED