APHC010436492026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7235/2026 Between: 1. ABHILASH RAVI RAO, S/O RAVIRAO, AGED 21 YEARS,R/O NEAR SHIVA TEMPLE, MARATA ROAD, BILAKI VILLAGE,GRAMANTHARA POLICE STATION, BHADRAVATHI TALUKA,SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, STATE OF KARNATAKA. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradeshat Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. DASARI RAMAKOTESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.4 on bail in F.I.R.No.71 of 2026 of Vizianagaram I Town Police Station, Vizianagaram District, registered for the offences 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’). 2. Mr.Dasari Ramakoteswara Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, it is urged to allow the Petition. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law and urged to dismiss the Petition. 3 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On perusal of the record, the Petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.4 in this case. The Petitioner was arrested on 13.04.2026. He has been in the judicial custody for the past 155 days. The Petitioner was apprehended on the spot while he was found in illegal possession and transportation of 49.750 kilograms of ganja. After thorough investigation, Charge Sheet has been filed. The accusation against the Petitioner is well‑founded. 6. In this connection, it is relevant to refer the following decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. In Union of India v. Ram Samujh1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court at Paragraph No.7 observed that narcotic offences have a grave and far-reaching impact on society, destroying numerous lives. The Court further held that drug traffickers pose a continuing threat to society and, therefore, the statutory restrictions must be strictly enforced. 7. In Durand Didier v. State (UT of Goa)2, the Hon’ble Apex Court at Paragraph No.24, observed that illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs has become a serious social menace, particularly affecting the youth. The Court further noted that, in view of its devastating impact on society, Parliament enacted stringent provisions under ‘the NDPS Act’ to effectively combat the menace. 1 (1999) 9 SCC 429 2 (1990) 1 SCC 95 4 8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Rajesh3, at Paragraph Nos.8, 19, 20 and 21, held that bail under ‘the NDPS Act.,’ can be granted only upon strict compliance with the mandatory conditions prescribed under Section 37. The Court further observed that ‘reasonable grounds’ require substantial material showing that the accused is not guilty, and recording such a finding is a sine quanon for grant of bail. 9. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ram Samujh, Durand Didier and Rajesh supra, the request of the Petitioner cannot be considered at this juncture, inasmuch as the accusation is well‑founded. There are no reasonable grounds to believe that the Petitioner has not committed any offence or that he would refrain from committing offences in future if he is enlarged on bail. There are no merits in the case for grant of bail. Hence, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 15.09.2026 PRA/VMM 3 (2020) 12 SCC 122 5 18 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7235 of 2026 Date: 15.09.2026 PRA/VMM