APHC010464382026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] SATURDAY, THE 19th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7757/2026 Between: 1. PARTHASATRATHI SANKAR, S/O PARTHASARATHI LATE AGED 42 YEARS, OCC VEGETABLE BUSINESS,MALUR TOWN ADARSHANAGAR STREET KOLAR DISTRICT KARNATAKA STATE. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.4 AND 1. 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. KOPPISETTI PARVATI DEVI 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.4 on bail in Crime No.49 of 2025 of 2 Koyyuru Police Station, Alluri Sitharama Raju District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 111(2)(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNS’) and Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Mrs.Koppisetti Parvati Devi, 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 and submitted that, though the Charge Sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the Petitioner are well‑founded. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 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 allegation against the Petitioner is that he was indulged in dealing with 25.520 kilograms of ganja. After thorough investigation, Charge Sheet was filed on 17.04.2026, which was numbered as NSC.No.237 of 2026. 3 The Petitioner was arrested on 21.11.2025 and has been in judicial custody for the past 302 days. 6. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there is one similar adverse antecedent reported against the Petitioner. The Petitioner has not disclosed in the petition the said adverse antecedent reported against him. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Zeba Khan v. State of U.P.,1 wherein, at Paragraph Nos. 47 and 48, it was observed that bail applications are often considered on the basis of prima facie material placed before the Court at different stages of the proceedings. The Court held that non-disclosure of material facts, such as criminal antecedents, prior bail rejections, custody period, and the stage of trial, may result in an erroneous grant or refusal of bail. It was further held that every bail applicant is under an obligation to disclose all material particulars, including criminal antecedents and any coercive processes pending against him, duly supported by an affidavit. Such disclosure is necessary to ensure transparency, uniformity, and integrity in bail adjudication. 7. The revised Standing Order No.282(1) of the High Court of the Andhra Pradesh stated in every application for bail presented to the High Court, the Petitioner shall state whether similar application has or has not been made to the Supreme Court, and if made shall state the result thereof. The petitioner/applicant shall also mention whether he/she is/was involved in any 12026 SCC Online 188 4 other criminal case or not. If yes, particulars and decisions thereof. An application which does not contain this information shall be placed before the bench with the necessary information. 8. The Petitioner is a permanent resident of Karnataka State. He has got fixed abode. If the Petitioner is enlarged on bail, he is likely to cooperate with the learned Trial Court for the expeditious disposal of the case. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations leveled against the Petitioner/Accused No.4, and the period of incarceration undergone by the Petitioner/Accused No.4, this Court is inclined to enlarge him on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chintapalli. ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every adjournment without fail. iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall not leave the limits of the Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. 5 v. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court. vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.4 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:19.09.2026 PRA/VMM 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITIONNo.7757 of 2026 Date:19.09.2026 PRA/VMM