1 APHC010669102025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 12808/2025 Between: 1. B SANTOSH REDDY ALIAS SANTOSH REDDI, S/O. B. MURALI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,OCC FIREMAN, ODISHA FIRE EMERGENCY SERVICES,R/O ASHOK NAGAR, NEAR B.E.D. COLLEGE,KORAPUT DISTRICT, ODISHA STATE, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP, Amaravati ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. TANUJA DUNGI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following: ORDER: This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., is filed by the Petitioner herein/A8 seeking to grant anticipatory bail in Crime No.202 of 2024 of Ramabhadrapuram Police Station, Vizianagaram District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no ganja was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The contraband seized in the 2 present crime, namely 810 kgs of ganja, was recovered from the possession of A1 to A3. Learned counsel would further submit that there is no material on record to link the petitioner with A1 to A3 and that, moreover, the petitioner has no previous criminal record. Learned counsel would also submit that the charge sheet has been filed in the matter. Learned counsel finally prays that this Court may be pleased to allow the petition by granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner 4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and would submit that special teams were sent to Odisha for the apprehension of the petitioner, who is the prime accused and the source of supplying ganja to Andhra Pradesh through A1 to A3. It is further submitted that the call detail records at the relevant point of time connect the accused with the present crime. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor finally submits that there is no change in circumstances since the dismissal of the earlier bail application and prays for dismissal of the present petition. 5. Considering the submissions made and upon a perusal of the material on record, it goes to show that, in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, though the contraband of 810 kgs of ganja was not seized from the physical possession of the petitioner, it is represented by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor that the petitioner is the prime accused and the source of the contraband. It is further submitted that the Investigating Officer has collected material to show that there were conversations between the petitioner and the other accused at the relevant point of time. 3 6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to consider the request of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. 7. The petitioner is directed not to file this type of application again before this Court. 8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 27.01.2026 Asr 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Crl.P.No.12808 of 2025 Date: 27.01.2026 Asr