MADDALA UDAY KUMAR ALIAS UDAY v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
CRLP/10757/2025 · 2025-12-23
Y Lakshmana Rao
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 42078 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 42078 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010546842025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10757/2025 Between:
MADDALA UDAY KUMAR ALIAS UDAY, S/O. VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED. 29,
R/O. D.NO.4-105/5, MADHURANAGAR, S.ATCHUTAPURAM, KAKINADA RURAL MANDAL,
KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2 AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, (Sarpavaram Police Station, Kakinada District) Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.10757 of 2025 Dated 24.12.2025
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.2 on bail in Crime No.273 of 2025 of Sarpavaram Police Station, Kakinada District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Mr. P. Vivek, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent. He has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He is a law-abiding citizen. He has a fixed abode. He would abide by any condition that this Court deems fit to impose while enlarging him on bail. Investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has also been filed. The petitioner has been in judicial custody for the past 182 days. Hence, it is urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 3. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that the charge sheet has been filed within 180 days. Section 29 of ‘the NDPS Act’ would squarely apply to the petitioner and the other accused. The petitioner and the other accused were arrested on the spot. They have allegedly indulged in dealing with 30.00 Kgs of ganja, which is a commercial
3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.10757 of 2025 Dated 24.12.2025
quantity. The petitioner was involved in 10 IPC cases and two NDPS cases. The petitioner is a rowdy-sheeter and it is urged to dismiss the petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5.
As seen from the record, the petitioner and the other accused were arrested on the spot. The petitioner was found in possession of 8.00 Kgs of ganja. On perusal of the entire record, Section 29 of ‘the NDPS Act’ would squarely apply to the petitioner and the other accused. In total, they purchased 30.00 Kgs of ganja from one person in the agency area for an amount of Rs.3,000/- per kg. They transported the said ganja in a car and kept the ganja in a house. After thorough investigation, the charge sheet has been filed within 180 days. Accused No.1 was found in possession of 8.00 Kgs of ganja. Accused No.3 was found in possession of 7.00 Kgs of ganja, as mentioned supra. Accused No.2 was found in possession of 8.00 Kgs of ganja. Altogether, 23.00 Kgs of ganja was found with all the accused. The petitioner is a rowdy-sheeter. He has been involved in 10 cases registered against the petitioner under the provisions of ‘the IPC’ and there are two cases registered under the provisions of ‘the NDPS Act’ against the petitioner. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity and nature of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused No.2, and in view of the filing of the charge sheet, the accusations are well-founded against the petitioner. Hence, there are no merits to grant bail to the
4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.10757 of 2025 Dated 24.12.2025
Petitioner/Accused No.2 at this juncture. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 24.12.2025 RSI
5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.10757 of 2025 Dated 24.12.2025
93 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10757 of 2025
Date: 24.12.2025 RSI