Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4191 (AP)

Sivesh Singh v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

CRLP/589/2025 · 2025-03-21

T Mallikarjuna Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

lN THE HIGH COURT 6F ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMA FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARC TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE I MALLIKARJUNA RAO ~ CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 589 OF 2025 Between : 1. Sivesh Singh, S/o Kii§hna Dev Singh Aged 28 Years, Kushni Khera Village, Dhanakoli Post Unnao District. Uttar Pradesh 2. Pankaj @ Suresh kaka, S/o Gangaram @ Gangadhar Aged 30 Years, . Mohini Khera Village, Mourya Police Station Limits Unnao District. Uttar Pradesh. Petitioners/Accused 2 & 3 AND The State ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. Respondent/Complainant Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, (New Sections 480 & 483 of BNSS, 2023) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners on bail in pri~cr. -No 261/2024, Ravulapalem East Godavari COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS : MS. KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER [3369] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE I MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 589/2025 Between : sivesh singh and others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioners/A2 and A3, seeking regular bail in cr.No.261/2024 of Ravulapalem Police Station, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Konaseema District. 2. The above said crime was registered against the petitioners/A2 and A3 herein and others for the offence punishable u/See.8(c) I/w Sec.20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act. 3. The case of the prosecution in br'lef is as follows: on 28.8.2024 at about 6.00 am, the Sub-Inspector of Ravulapalem police station, on receipt of credible information about illegal possession and transportation of ganja, secured the presence of mediators and rushed to NH-216-A road, near HP petrol bunk, Ravulapalem village of €=---s Ravulapalem Mandal and found Al to A3 in possession and illegal transportation of 180 kgs of ganja in a Ashok Leyland lorry bearing registration No.UP32KN1458 proceeding from Rajahmundry to Uttarpradesh State via Haryana. Al to A3 confessed that they purchased the same from A4. The contraband along with vehicle and other material was seized under cover of a mediators report and a case has been registered against the accused. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are in J'udiCial Custody from 02.9.2024 and most of the investigation is completed and after expiry of statutory period, police have not filed charge sheet as such the petitioner is entitled for statutory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor also confirms non-filing of charge sheet by the police even after statutory period is completed, but opposed to grant bail. 6. Heard both sides. 7. lt is evident that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 02.9.2024 and most of the investigation might have been completed by this time. Given that the petitioners have been in remand since 02.9.2024, this Court views that most of the investigation concerning the petitioner's role in the commission of the alleged offence has likely been concluded. It has been submitted that the petitioners have permanent residence, and there is no credible apprehension of their fleeing away from justice. Additionally, since most of the witnesses are official, the release of the petitioners -would not impede the investigation or tamper with the evidence and also after completion of statutory per'lod, police have not filed charge sheet and also they have not filed any petit'lon for extension of time for investigation. 8. ln view of the aforesaid facts and Circumstances Of the Case, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners/A2 and A3 with following conditions. (i) The petitioners/A2 and.A3 herein shall be released on their executing a personal bond for Rs.1O,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kothapeta ; (ii) on release, the petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned once in a week 'l.e. On every sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., till filing of charge sheet; (iii) the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence and hamper the investigation and shall cooperate for investigation. 9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. sD/-G.HELANAIDU G IS'T RAR rot;i lcER / ASSISTANT SECTION For / //TRUE COPY// 4. OneCCto IV[O.T`ul I.___ 5 Two CCs to PUBuC PROSECUTOR, Hlgh Court Of A.P[OUTl 6. One SPare COPY To, 1. The JudlCla\ First Class Ma?lS_i_+=\_e: KDOt+AahPmetua 2. The Superintendent, Central PriSO" Raiahmundry 3 The StatlOn House Officer, RaVulaPalem PollCe StatlOn, East GodaVan 4. One CC to MS KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI Advocate [OPUC1 -----n lJ-,nh r.nllrt Of A.P[OUTl \ + I HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED..21 /03/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.589 of 2025 ALLOWED _I------:_-I- i#,STf.GIA i £S# lli.iJEi 27 MAR !#!5\