APHC010369012026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY, THE 16th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5964/2026 Between: 1. MASTHAN ALI KHAN, S/O AYUB KHAN AGED 27 YEARS C/ MUSLIM, R/OGAURIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKBALLAPUR DISTRICT KARNATAKA STATE. A-2 2. SULTAN SALEEM ALIAS SALEEM, S/O AHAMED JAN, AGED 35 YEARS, R/OHOMBAKKAJJI COMPOUND, MADHUGIRI TUMUKUR DISTRICT KARNATAKASTATE. A-4 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradeshat Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): JESHTADI SUNIL KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5964 of 2026 Dated 16.09.2026 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), by the petitioners/Accused Nos.2&4, seeking grant of bail in Crime No.362 of 2025 of Bommuru Police Station, East Godavari District, registered for the alleged 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. Sri G. Maheswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners are innocents of the alleged offences and have been falsely implicated in the present case and that they have not committed any offence. They are law-abiding citizens and the sole earning members of their respective families. The petitioners undertake to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court while enlarging them on bail. Hence, learned counsel prays that the Criminal Petition may be allowed. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners and submitted that, though the charge sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the petitioners are well founded. Hence, he prayed that the Criminal Petition be dismissed. 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5964 of 2026 Dated 16.09.2026 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 5. Thoughtful consideration has been bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. 6. Now, the point for consideration is: “Whether the petitioners are entitled to grant of bail?” 7. As seen from the record, the Petitioners were arrested on the spot while they were allegedly found in illegal possession of 334.00 kgs of ganja. The Petitioners were arrested on 22.11.2025 and have been in judicial custody for the past 298 days. The seized contraband is not only a commercial quantity but also a colossal quantity. After a thorough investigation, the charge-sheet was filed well within the statutory period of 180 days and the same has been numbered as NSC.No.102 of 2026. Of course, there are no adverse antecedents reported against the Petitioners. The accusations against the Petitioners are prima facie well founded. 8. In this connection, it is relevant to refer the following decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. 9. 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 1(1999) 9 SCC 429 4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5964 of 2026 Dated 16.09.2026 held that drug traffickers pose a continuing threat to society and, therefore, the statutory restrictions must be strictly enforced. 10. 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. 11. 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 qua non for grant of bail. 12. 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, the request of the petitioners cannot be considered at this juncture. The petitioners are alleged to have been involved in the commission of the offence. This Court is not satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners are not guilty of the alleged offence or that they are unlikely to commit any offence while 2(1990) 1 SCC 95 3(2020) 12 SCC 122 5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5964 of 2026 Dated 16.09.2026 on bail. Therefore, there are no merits in the present case warranting grant of bail to the petitioners. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 13. 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: 16.09.2026 RSI/DRNR 6 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5964 of 2026 Dated 16.09.2026 68 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5964 of 2026 Date: 16.09.2026 RSI/DRNR