APHC010465692026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7782/2026 Between: 1. SHAIK SADAK VALLI, S/O SHAIK ABDUL AZEEZ, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARSRJO CHITVEL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED 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. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI 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.2 on bail in NDPS.SC.No.453 of 2025 on the file of the learned I Additional District Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court 2 under the NDPS Act, East Godavari District, Rajamahendravaram in Cr.No.137 of 2025 of Gandepalli Police Station, Kakinada District 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. Mr.Sivaprasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated. He is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his continued incarceration would cause severe hardship to his dependents. It is further submitted that he is a law-abiding citizen. He has got fixed abode. He undertakes to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petition. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, 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, this is the third bail application filed by the Petitioner. The first bail application, vide order dated 18.06.2026 in Crl.P.No.3459 of 2026, was dismissed as withdrawn. The second bail application, vide order in Crl.P.No.4933 of 2026, was dismissed on merits. 3 The Charge Sheet was filed well within 180 days. The Petitioner was arrested on the spot. There is one similar adverse antecedent reported against the Petitioner. The crime pertains to the year 2025. There is no change of circumstances from the date of dismissal of the earlier bail application till the filing of the present third bail application. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the absence of any change in circumstances since the dismissal of the earlier bail application, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail at this stage. There are no merits in the Petition. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 7. 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: 21.09.2026 PRA 4 103 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7782 of 2026 Date: 21.09.2026 PRA