[3521] T. .Io,Tw COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FIVE a: a S) iPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9331 OF 2025 Between: Verothi Mahalakshmi Naidu @ Naidu @ Thunglam Naidu, S/o V.Somu Naidu, Age 34 years, R/o D.No.5-4-50/1, Shivalayam, Kapu Thunglam, BHPV Post, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Petitioner/Accused-8 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravati. High Court Respondent/Complainant Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS is filed 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 Cr. No. 303 of 2021, of Special Enforcement petitioner/Accused-8 on bail in Bureau Station, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam under section 8© R/w 20(b){ii)(c) of NDPS Act 1985 dated 29- 12-2021. The petition/Appeal coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of . Sri KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU Advocate PROSECUTOR (AP) for the Respondent and the Court for the Petitioner, PUBLIC made the following. APHC010471072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9331/207/^ [3521] Between: Verothi Mahalakshmi Naidu Alias Naidu Alias Thunglam Naidu ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KAKUMANU JOJIAMRUTHA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT This criminal petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioner- accused No.8 on bail in crime No. 303 of 2021 of SEB, Gajuwaka Police under Section 20 (b) (ii) (C) read Substances Act, Station, registered for the offence punishable with Section 8 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic 1985 (for short, 'the NDPS Act'). 2 CASE OF THE PROSECUTION! 2. Material averments stemming from the case of the prosecution are that on 29.12.2021 on credible information about illegal transportation of ganja, the Enforcement Inspector of Police along with staff and mediators rushed to side of Sri Nidhi Transport, Shivaji Nagar, Kurmannapalem, Gajuwaka found the accused along with 120 kgs of ganja. Then the Enforcement Inspector of Police arrested accused and seized 120 kgs of ganja from them. East and CONTENTIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER! 3. Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, without any cogent evidence linking to the commission of the crime. It is contended that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and his arrest would cause undue hardship and prejudice to the dependents of the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to abide by any condition that this Court may impose while granting bail to the petitioner. 4. It is further submitted that the petitioner has permanent place of residence and there is no likelihood of him absconding or evading the process of law. The petitioner has cooperated with the investigation thus far and assure continued cooperation in future proceedings. It is also urged that the allegations are of a nature that do not warrant further custodial detention , and if 3 any condition is imposed while granting the bail, the petitioner would not violate it; and it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms.Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, strenuously opposed the grant of bail, contending that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses are yet to be examined. It is submitted that enlargement of the petitioner on bail at this stage would seriously hamper the progress of the investigation and may result in non cooperation from the petitioner. The prosecution further apprehends that the petitioner, if released may influence or intimidate witnesses, thereby obstructing the course of justice. It is also urged that there exists a real and imminent risk of the petitioner absconding and evading the due process of law. Given the gravity of the allegations and the potential threat to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the petitioner do not deserve the discretionary relief of bailand it is urged to dismiss the bail petition. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION! 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of learned counsel for both sides, now the point for consideration is: Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail? 4 ANALYSIS: As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.8 is that he indulged in supplying 20 kgs of ganja to Accused Nos.3 and 4. The total quantity of ganja involved in this case is 120 kgs. The role of the petitioner/Accused No.8 came to light based on the confession of Accused Nos.3 and 4, who stated that the petitioner had supplied 20 kgs of ganja to them. The petitioner was arrested on 24.07.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 73 days. So far, eight witnesses have been examined. The substantial portion of the investigation, insofar as the petitioner’s involvement is concerned, has been completed. All the witnesses examined are official witnesses. Therefore, the question of the petitioner threatening the witnesses, hampering the investigation, or tampering with the evidence does not arise. 8. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only), with two sureties each for the like each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Excise, Visakhapatnam. sum 5 ii- The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall Station House Officer concerned appear before the 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.8 shall not leave the limits State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. of the IV. The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall investigating officer in further investigation of the make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. Vi. The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat acquainted with the facts of the from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. V. cooperate with the case and shall or promise to any person case so as to dissuade him/her VII. The petitioner/Accused No.8 shall surrender his if any, to the investigating officer. If he claim passport, that he do not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. SDI- K.J.RAJA BABU ASSISTAN^EGISTRAR se6tion officer //TRUE COPY// I To, 1. The Special Judicial First Class Magistrate For Excise, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam. 3. The Station House Officer, Special Enforcement Bureau Station Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam 4. One CC to SRI. KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU Advocate [OPUC] ^ High Court of A.P.,Amaravati 6. One spare copy // HIGH COURT DR.YLR,J DATED:07/10/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.9331 of 2025 ALLOWED