APHC010209842026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3179/2026 Between: ALA ASHOK KUMAR, S/O PRABHU, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,R/O LAKSHMIPURAM VILLAGE,GUDIMETLA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 521185 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHANDARLAPADU POLICE STATION, NTR COMMISSIONERATE, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. VELADI SAI SRI HARSHA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed seeking to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner / Accused No.5, in connection with Crime No.18 of 2026 on the file of Chandarlapadu Police Station, NTR Commissionerate which is registered for the offence under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short ‘NDPS Act’). 2 2. Heard Sri Veladi Sai Sri Harsha, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Ms.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the Respondent/State. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is falsely implicated in the present case based on the confession of the co- accused. Learned counsel would further submit that no contraband was seized from the possession of the Petitioner and the contraband involved in this case is 10 kgs which is a non-commercial quantity. Learned counsel would submit that the Petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the Petitioner. 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition and would submit that the Petitioner was absconded while the Police were conducting raid. It is further submitted that the investigation is still going on and the Petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail at this stage. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition. 5. It is not in dispute that the investigation in the present case is still at a nascent stage. The allegation against the Petitioner is that he was involved in the offence along with the co-accused. Though it is contended that no contraband was recovered from the possession of the Petitioner, it is seen that the prosecution has specifically alleged that the Petitioner absconded at the time of the raid, which prima facie indicates his involvement and raises suspicion requiring thorough investigation. The nature of the allegations, the stage of investigation, and the conduct attributed to the Petitioner, 3 particularly his alleged abscondence, are relevant factors to be considered while deciding a petition for anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that granting anticipatory bail at this stage would hamper the ongoing investigation. The Petitioner has not made out a case warranting exercise of the extraordinary discretionary relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Dt.28.04.2026 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3179 of 2026 Dated:28.04.2026 Dinesh