f IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV^ THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER .M TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRES^NT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RA" CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10045 OF 2025 ,-op y. '.VTitv V -y J- i V, i"' • ‘y*- Between: Korra Raja Rao @ Raja, S/o. Late Parusuram, aged about 50,years, Rt^ Kummariputtu Village, Pattam Panchayat, Hukumpeta Mandal, Alluri Sitharama Raju District, Also at Bairadavalasa Village, Pattam Panchayat, Hukumpeta Mandal, Alluri Sitharama Raju District. Petitioner/Accused No.11 AND TI;i4^ State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. Respondent Petition under Sections 480 & 483 of BNSS (Old Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C), 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 Petitioher/Accused No. 11 on bail pending disposal of Crime No. 169/2024 of Vizianagaram Rural P.S., Vizianagaram District. ir- The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri BOOSARA V N PRAVEEN KUMAR, Advocate for the Petitioner and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent and the Court made the following: P N* ii 1 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.l0045 of 2025 Dated 06.11.2025 APHC010512462025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ■ [3521] S- THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10045/2025 Between: KORRA RAJA RAO @ RAJA,, S/0. LATE PARUSURAM, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS PANCHAYAT, HUKUMPETA MANDAL, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT, PANCHAYAT, HUKUMPETA MANDAL, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT. R/0. KUMMARIPUTTU VILLAGE, PATTAM ALSO AT BAIRADAVALASA VILLAGE, PATTAM ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Courtpleased to Petitioner/Accused No. 11 on bail pending disposal of Crime No. 169/2024 of Vizianagaram Rural P.S., Vizianagaram District and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.BOOSARA V N PRAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR enlarge the 2 Dr. YLR,J Crl.P.No.l0045 of2025 Dated 06.11.2025 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’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No. 11 on bail in Crime No. 169 of 2024 of Vizianagaram Rural Police Station, Vizianagaram District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused Noll herein for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(c) read with Section 8 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3. The learned Single Judge of this Court in Criminal Petition No.2999 of 2025 on 27.03.2025 enlarged the accused No.6 on bail on the ground that no adverse antecedents are found and nothing was seized from the possession of accused No.6. The petitioner is also standing on the same footing. The petitioner/Accused No. 11 was arrested based on the confession of accused Nos.5 and 6. He was arrested on 03.07.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 123 days. Although the petitioner was arrested as he was indulged in dealing with commercial quantity. By applying the principle of parity, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Alluri Sitharama Raju District. He has got fixed abode. If / 3 Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.l0045 of 2025 Doted 06.11.2025 conditions are imposed, there is no likelihood of his absconding or evading the process of law. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has got one similar adverse antecedent. Be that as it may, the petitioner/Accused No. 11 is presumed to be innocent until the guilt is proved. In Prabhakar Tiwari v. State of U.P. and others^ the Hon’ble Apex Court has categorically held that criminal antecedents should not be taken into consideration while considering an application for grant of bail. Of Accused Nos.4, 7, and 9 are to be arrested and it is nothing to do with the release of the petitioner. So far, five witnesses have been examined, all of whom are material and official witnesses. Therefore, the possibility of the petitioner threatening the official witnesses, tampering with evidence hampering the investigation does not arise. Substantial portion of the alleged investigation in so far the involvement of the petitioner concerned is completed. course or 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the petitioner/Accus ed No.11, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.11 on bail. 5. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner /Accused No.11 shall be enlarged bail subject to his executing bond for a sum of on 1 2020 (11) see 648 4 Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of < the learned Additional, Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram. ii. The petitioner/Accused No. 11 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 the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner /Accused No. 11 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner /Accused No. 11 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. V. The petitioner/Accused No. 11 shall cooperate with 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. 11 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. P’ SD/-A.VIJAYA BABU deputy REGI^RAR SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// V / 'WAi' ' To, 1. The I Additional Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of Cases under NDPS Act, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 2. The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Vizianagaram 3. The Superintendent, Central Jail,iVisakhapatnam 4. The Station House Officer, Vizianagaram Rural Police Station, Vizianagaram District. 5. One CC to SRI. BOOSARA V N PRAVEEN KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT] 7. One spare copy KJ 1.-' ■ if« HIGH COURT DR.YLR.J DATED:06/11/2025 •k BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.10045 of 2025 ALLOWED I 1 i