Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 9322 (AP)

SRI KINTHARLA CHANTIBABU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

CRLP/2165/2025 · 2025-03-27

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

\.+ `` ```> INTHEHIGHCOUR+OFANDHRAPRADESHAT THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.-2165 OF 2025 Betwee n : sri Kintharla Chantl'babu, S/o Pandanna, Aged 36 yrs, Yestha]a Village, Luwasingi Panchayat, of G Madugula MandaI, ASR District ...Petitioner/Accused No.3 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through the s.H.O., of Ravikamatham p.s., Rep., by Its public prosecutor High Court at AmaravathI. ...Respondent/complal-nan-i Petition under sections 480 & 483 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the criminal Petition, the High Court \inay be pleased to Enlarge the petI'tiOner/A-3 on BaI-I in connection with the crI-me in F.I.R. No. 70/2023 dt.22-08-2023 of Ravikamatham p.s., Anakapal'i by AIIowl'ng the crI'ml'nal PetI-lion. The Petition coming onior hearI-ng, upon perusing the Petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI R SIVA SAI SWARUP, Advocate for the petjtI'Oner, and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, for the Respondent, the court made the following EEJ=[i=LiHEEE LL / 2 sefty``.`` THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA i-s`\) .. CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2165 of 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/Accused No.3, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.70 of 2023 of Ravikamatham Police station, Anakapalli. 2. A case has been registered against the Petitioner herein and Others for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short lthe NDPS Act'). 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, iS that, On 20.02.2023, three persons from Krishna District approached the petitioner for supply Of Ganja. The petitioner informed them that he had 22 Kgs of Ganja, which they agreed to purchase. on 22.08.2023, the petitioner accompanied them to Paderu with the contraband and assisted them in boarding a bus. On receipt of credible informat'lon, the police of Ravikamatham Police Station, along with his staff and mediators apprehended them and seized the contraband. After seizing the contraband, the Police arrested them and registered the present crime. upon production before the accused concerned court, they were remanded to judicial custody. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant J5. Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/state. perused the material on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that nothing has been seized from the possession of the petitioner/A3. The contraband involved in this matter is 22 Kgs of Ganja, which is seized from the possession of Al and \ A2. Present petitioner is A3. By the time, petitioner was caught up, the entire investigation was completed. The petitioner is languishing in prison since 01.12.2024. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that there are no other cases pending against the petI'tiOner/A3 and the petitioner is ready to furnish surety to the satisfaction of the court. Learned counsel finally Prays tO release him on regular bail. 6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that investigation is pending for want of inventory. Nothing has been seized from the possession of the petitioner, Basing on the confession of Al and A2, this case is lodged against the petitioner. Learned Assistant public Prosecutor finally submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 7. ln the light of the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, it is the statement of Al and A2 before the poII'Ce that they have purchased Ganja from the present petitioner. As rightly put by learned counsel for the petitioner, the contraband was not seized from the possession of the petitioner/A3. The crucial part of the I'nVeStigatiOn iS completed and is pending for inventory. Considering the circumstances referred supra, this 1. The Additional Judicial FI'rSt Class Magistrate, chodavaram, Visakhapatnam DistrI'Ct 2. The Superintendent, central prI'SOn, Vl-sakhapatnam, vjsakhapatnam District 3. The Stall-on House officer, Ravl-kamatham police statl'on, Anakapalli Dl'strI-Ct one cc to sRl. R SIVA SAI SWARUP Advocate [opuc] Two cos to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] One spare copy ~r HIGH COURT Dr.VJP,J DATED :27/03/2025 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.2165 of 2025 ALLOWED -,-~_-`r=_.,ar' f.,} ji*. PRE--ou E` E-~=S- 2 \ NI\R \It15 ''::..,.:;,f, .ia