APHC010640932025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12341/2025 Between: 1. ANBAR KHAN, S/O. SALIM KHAN, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O. 68 GA, HIRANA MARG VILLAGE,JAMNER,TEHSIL SHAJAPUR, MADHYA PRADESH ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its public prosecutor,High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High CourtPleased to release the petitioner/Accused-1 on bail in SC .NDPS 457 of 2023, in crime no. 176 of 2021 Yelamachili Rural Police Station, Anakapalli District on the file I Additonal District & Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of Offences Under NDPS Act, Visakhpatnam and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12341 of 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the petitioner herein/Accused No.1, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.176 of 2021 of Yelamanchili Rural Police Station, Anakapalli District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 read with 8(C) of the NDPS Act. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief, is that, on 16.09.2021, this petitioner and other accused were found in possession of 224 kgs of Ganja while they were transporting the same. When the police persons detained this petitioner and other accused, the petitioner escaped from the place of seizure. Subsequently, he was arrested on 19.08.2025. 3. Heard Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was arrested on 19.08.2025, since then, he has been in judicial custody. He would further submit that the petitioner is innocent and the petitioner is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner finally prays for grant of bail to the petitioner by imposing any conditions. 3 5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that the investigation is not yet completed. The quantity of contraband involved in present crime is 224 Kgs of Ganja, which is a commercial quantity. The Statutory period of 180 days is not over. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally prays for dismissal of the petition in the light of the bar under Section 37 of NDPS Act. 6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Rajesh1 at Paragraph Nos.8, 19, 20 and 21 held as under: 8. To curb the spread of dangerous drugs, Parliament has mandated that an accused under the NDPS Act cannot be granted bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe he is not guilty and will not commit offences while on bail. The High Court failed to justify ignoring these mandatory conditions when releasing the accused. Instead of considering the grave socio-economic and health consequences of illegal drug trafficking, the court ought to have enforced the law in the spirit intended by Parliament. 19. Section 37 imposes additional, overriding restrictions on the grant of bail, beyond those under Section 439 CrPC, through its non obstante clause. It prohibits bail unless two mandatory conditions are met: the prosecution is given an opportunity to oppose, and the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty. If either condition is not fulfilled, the bar against granting bail applies. 20.The term “reasonable grounds” requires more than mere prima facie satisfaction; it demands substantial, probable causes showing the accused is not guilty. Such belief must arise from facts and circumstances sufficient to justify that conclusion. In the present case, the High Court overlooked the strict object of Section 37, and its liberal approach to bail under the NDPS Act was unwarranted. 21.The learned Single Judge failed to record the mandatory finding required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which is a sine qua non for granting bail in such cases. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner does not deserve for grant of regular bail at this stage. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. However, the learned Special Judge is 1 (2020) 12 SCC 122 4 directed to proceed with the matter and take every necessary step for speedy disposal of the case. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed. __________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 05.02.2026. sj 5 23 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12341/2025 Dt.05.02.2026 sj