APHC010521902025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10191 OF 2025 Between: PANGI SADNO ALIAS CHADUNU, S/O. PANGI ARJUN, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O. SADUPAKALU VILLAGE, GUDEM KOTHA VEEDHI MANDAL, ALLURI SEETHA RAMARAJU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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.3 on bail in Crime No. 27 of 2019 of Maredumilli Police Station, Alluri Seetha Rama Raju District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No. 3 herein for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the case of the prosecution are that on 14.06.2019, the S.H.O of Police and his staff while conducting vehicle check, they were found one Bolero Max Pickup bearing AP 23 W 4158 coming from Gurthedu side towards Maredumilli. On seeing the Police, the driver of the said vehicle got down and tried to skulk away. The Police caught hold of him and searched the vehicle, wherein it was found 210 Kgs of ganja in 100 packets and seized the same under cover of mediator’s report and registered the above case. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Mr.Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there is no prima facie material or cogent evidence connecting the Petitioner to the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family and that his incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to comply with any condition that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to impose while considering the prayer for grant of bail. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Sadupakalu Village, Gudem Kotha Veedhi Mandal, ASR Raju District and there exists no apprehension of his absconding or evading the due process of law. The Petitioner has extended full cooperation during the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in all future proceedings. It is also urged that the nature of the allegations does not necessitate custodial interrogation, and that the imposition of appropriate conditions would suffice to secure the ends of justice. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigative process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioner. The prosecution further articulates a credible apprehension that, if released, the Petitioner may exert undue influence upon, or intimidate, prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiating the evidentiary foundation of the case. It is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. In view of the gravity and allegations, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner is not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. 7. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 8. In view of the rival submissions advanced by both the learned Counsel and upon a perusal of the prosecutorial narrative, the pivotal issue now meriting for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 9. As seen from the Mediator’s Report, dated 05.08.2025 at 4.00 p.m, it was mentioned that the Petitioner himself surrendered before the V.R.O of Maredumilli in connection with a case in Crime No.27 of 2019 of Maredumilli Police Station. The role of the Petitioner/ Accused No.3 has come into light based on the confession of Accused No.1. The prosecution alleged that the Petitioner/ Accused No.3 is a supplier of 210 Kgs of ganja to Accused No.1. It is a commercial quantity. For the past more than 5 years, the Petitioner has been fleeing away from the clutches of law, ultimately after 5 years of alleged offence realization struck to the Petitioner and himself surrendered before the Investigating Officer. The source of supply of 210 Kgs of ganja is yet to be ascertained. Investigation in so far as Petitioner is concerned is pending and Charge Sheet is to be filed. Of course, no adverse criminal antecedents reported against the Petitioner. 10. In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations leveled against the Petitioner, this Court is not inclined to consider request of Petitioner for enlarging the Petitioner on bail at this juncture. CONCLUSION: 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date. 10.10.2025 KK