APHC010441252025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8821/2025 Between: Laveti Durga @ Macha, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. BANDI PRAVEENA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’) Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.1 on bail in Crime No.83 of 2024 of Ananthagiri Police Station, Alluri Seetha Rama Raju District, registered for 2 the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that, on 09.12.2024 at about 15:00 hours at Main Road Damuku Junction, Ananthagiri mandal, on receipt of reliable information, the Sub Inspector of Police along with staff and mediators conducted vehicle checking and found two persons got down a RTC bus. They the police caught hold them and found 4 kgs of ganja. Then the police arrested the accused and seized 4 kgs of ganja in the presence of mediators. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 4. Ms. Bandi Praveena, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; petitioner was falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioner is the sole breadwinner; petitioner would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and urged to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that the petitioner is the habitual offender, some more material witnesses have to be examined; investigation is not 3 completed; if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he would not be available for the investigation and he would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. The allegations against the petitioner/accused No.1 is that he along with other accused indulged in dealing with 4 kgs of ganja. It is not a commercial quantity. The petitioner was arrested on 26.05.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 97 days. The petitioner is permanent resident of Ananthagiri Area, Visakhapatnam City. Substantial portion of the investigation has been completed and all the witnesses are official witnesses. Therefore, the question of petitioner threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation or tampering the evidence may not arise. 7. Considering the entire gamut of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge–Special Judge for Trial of Offences under ‘the NDPS Act’, Visakhapatnam. ii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 4 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The petitioner/Accused No.1 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.1 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. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 04.09.2025 S D P 5 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.8821 of 2025 Date:04.09.2025 S D P