APHC010109402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2307/2025 Between: Muthyala Shyam ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. ANAND KUMAR KOCHIRI 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 "Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023" (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr. No.6 of 2025 of Araku Valley Police Station, Visakhapatnam. 2 2. The petitioner was arrested on 08.02.2025 and he has been in the judicial custody for the past 60 days. The petitioner has not committed similar offence on earlier occasion. 3. Sri P. M. Mithileswara Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri Anand Kumar Kochiri, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence, he was falsely implicated in the case; the petitioner is the sole bread-winner of his family; the petitioner will abide by any conditions imposed by this Court and urged to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, argued that prima-facie material is available against the petitioner that he had indulged in the possession of ganja weighing about 5 Kgs. The investigation is still in progress and urged to dismiss the petition. 5. I have perused the record. 6. It is the case of the prosecution that on 08.02.2025, the petitioner was found in possession of 5 Kgs of ganja. The contraband was seized under the cover of mediators’ report and the petitioner was arrested and sent to judicial remand on the same day. 3 7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor fairly conceded that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioner that he had involved in similar offences on earlier occasion. 8. The rigor of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’) would not be applicable in this case. The petitioner has been in the judicial custody for past 60 days; the petitioner is aged about 21 years. 9. In view of the fact that the material portion of the investigation has been completed, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 10. In the result, the criminal petition is allowed with the following conditions: i. The petitioner shall be enlarged on bail subject to he execute 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 and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for the Trial of Offences under ‘the NDPS Act’, Visakhapatnam. ii. The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly influence or threaten the witnesses. 4 iii. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and shall be available to the investigating officer as and when called by him. iv. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm. _________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dt: 08.04.2025 SCH 5 20 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2307/2025 08.04.2025 SCH 6