EF/-rlj`--n±tREEZE" i*_E 1 I iEi=L= `_ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV JrJ FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SR! JUSTICE T` MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.-3938 OF2025 # Between : #?giv` `, Mungi Ramesh, s/o, Nagaraju, Aged 27 Years, R/o. D.No. 27-2-99 Srjram Nagar, srinagar, Gajuwaka, visakhapatnam city ...Petitioner/Accused No.1 .; AND The State of Andhra pradesh7 rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra pradesh at Amaravatj ...Respondent/complainant petjtjon under sectI-OnS 480 & 483 of BNSS (Under Sections 437 & 439 of cr.p.c) prayI'ng that l'n the cI-rCumStanCeS Stated I-n the memorandum of grounds filed in support of `the criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant Bail to the petitioner/Accused No.1 I'n COnneCtI'On With Crime No.53 of 2025, Gal-uWaka Police statI'On Vjsakhapatnam city. The Petition coming on-for hearing, upon perusing the pe{jtjon and th6 memorandum of grounds fIIIed Ion Support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI RAMAKRISHNA AKURATHI Advocate for the petI'tiOner, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent; EE E=J Ei APHCO10185452025 ELIEIIl IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl (special Original Jurisdiction) [3369] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3938/2025 Between : Mungi Ramesh H.PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT counsel for the petitioner/accused: 1. RAMAKRISHNA AKURATHI counsel for the Respondent/COmPlainant: 1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court Ma±eJ=!±e±g±±Q±±±±Pg Ord±e±±= The Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the petitioner/A1, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.53 of 2025 of Gajuwaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam commissionerate, registered for the offence punishable under Section 20(b) read with 8(c) 'of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act, 1985. ¢_.- .` 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on o8.02.2o25, on receipt of credible information about illegal possession and transportation of MDMA Drug, the Sub-Inspector of police along with his staff and mediators rushed to D.No.27-2-99, Srjram Nagar, Sringar, Gajuwaka, vl-sakhapatnam and caught the accused in possession of 4 grams of MDMA Drug. The contraband along with other material was seized under the cover of mediators report. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the total quantity of contraband said to be involved in the present crime is 4 grams of MDMA drug and it does not come under the dell-nitiOn Of commercial quantity. Moreover, the petitioner herein was arrested on o8.02.2025 and sI-nee then he was languishing in jail. 4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has not disputed the correctness of the said submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that investigation in the present crime is not complet6d. 5. Heard. Perused the record. 6. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that even according to the case of the prosecution, the contraband alleged to be seized is not of commercial quantity. In support of the saI-d ./ . i -52rf \\\ `\\ \ contention, the petitioner counsel placed reliance on Section 2(viia) of the NDPS Act which reads as follows: (viia) "Commercial quantity", in relation to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, means` any quantity greater than the quantity specified by the Central Government by notification -In the Offic-Ial Gazette." 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner. also placed reliance on the notification specifying small quantity and commercial quantity. "A perusal of the above definition of commercial quantity would show that in relation to Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, any quantity which is greater than the quantity specified by the Central Government by notification in the official gazette wouI..d fall within the definition of commercial quantity. The relevant portion of the chaWtable which enumerates various narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and also specifies the quant-Ity On account Of Which either the drug WOuld be less than .small quantity or betvyeen small quantity and commercial quant-Ity Or iOmm€rCial quantity, -IS rePrO-duCed herein belOW'. Notification s small uantit and CQJIP]_merCial Quanfi± ln exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (vii-a) and (xxiii-a) of Section 2 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) and in supersess~IOn Of Ministry of F-InanCe, Department of Revenue Notification S.O. 527(E) dated 16th July,1996, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Governmenct hereby spec-lfies the quantity mentioned in columns 5 and 6 of the Table below, in relation to the narcotic drug or psychotropic substance mentioned in the corresponding entry in columns 2 to 4 of the said Table, as the small quantity and commercial quantity respectively for the purposes of the said clauses of that Section. ...- I +tl OSIV DIVraume ofIVarcof'-c other chew,ca sma/ commerfc,a/ 7 g andPsychotropicSubstances(Internationalnon-Proprietaryname(INN)2 nOnPrOPrietanyname3 I namequantity(ingm.) / 5 Quantity (ingm./kg-) 734 MDMA 4 6 Ill a-5gm. 10gm 8. A conjoI'nt reading ofsectjon 2(vlia) of NDPS Act and the table would show that the quantJ'ty more than 10 grams of MDMA would be considered to, be commercial quantl-ty. ln v,'ew of the same, this court finds force ln the submISSI'On of the learned counsel for the petJtlOner and I-I I-S also not d['sputed by the learned AssI-Slant PubI,-c Prosecutor. 9. The petitionerwas arrested on o8.02.2025 and since then he js I-n jall. The quantI-ty of MDMA allegedly involved jn the present crime I-S 4 grams, whJ'Ch IS non-commercJal quantlty. since the pe{ItlOner lS havI-ng permanent abode at vjsakhapatnam and I-n vI®eW Of the aforesald facts and clrcumstances of the case, request of the petltfOner can be consl'dered for ball. 10 Accordlngly, the crJmlnal PetJtlOn ls a"owed The petltloner sha" be released on ball on hIS executlng a personal bond for Rs 20,000/- +I _._. rEEf€fZE3JE€ I (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like Sum tO the satisfaction of the learned Ill Additional Judicial Magistrate, Gajuwaka. On release, the petitioner shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, once in a fortnight, for a Period Of three (3) months. The petitioner shall not hamper the investigation and tamPer with the prosecution witnesses. //TRUE COPY// For sD/-K.J.RAJA BABU AS SslEScTTAINoTN#:E#lscTERRAR ___ | \\-|\ ToI1. The Ill Additional Judicial Magistrate, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District ` 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam z t, District 3. The Station House Officer, Gajuwaka Pol®lce Station, Visakhapatnam o44, C'lty7 Visakhapatnam District 4. One CC to SRl. RAMAKRISHNAAKURATHI Advocate [OPUC] /4 5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh ## [OUT] 6. One spare copy PSR HIGH COURT TMR,J DATED :25/04/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.3938 of 2025 ALLOWED