APHC010290702026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4681/2026 Between: 1. MADIRI VARUN KUMAR ALIAS CHINNA RAJA, S/O PURUSHOTHAM, D.NO.465/32,BETHHELAM NAGAR, GUNADALA, VIJAYAWADA-520004 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF A.P., AMARAVATHI THROUGHS. H.O., MACHAVARAM POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R DISTRICT. ...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 Court pleased to release the Petitioner / Accused on bail in connection with the SC No 139 of 2025 Hon’ble 11 Additional District and Sessions Judge at Vijayawada and Crime No. 302 of 2025 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, N.T.R District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. VIKRAM KALAPALA Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused for granting of bail in connection with Crime No.302 of 2025 of Machavaram Police Station, N.T.R. District registered for the alleged offence 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. Heard Sri Vikram Kalapala, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.08.2025, on receipt of credible information, the police of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, along with mediators and staff, rushed to the Burial Ground at Lurdhu Nagar, Gunadala, and apprehended the petitioner/accused, namely, Madiri Varun Kumar @ Chinna Raja, while he was allegedly found in possession of ganja. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner had allegedly procured ganja from the Narsipatnam Agency area and stored the same in the cemetery at Lurdhu Nagar for sale. The police seized 24.700 kgs of ganja under the cover of a mediators' report and arrested the petitioner. Thereafter, he was remanded to judicial custody. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent. He is the sole breadwinner of his family. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He is a law-abiding citizen. He has a fixed abode. He 3 would abide by any conditions that this Court may deem fit to impose while enlarging the Petitioner on bail. Hence, it is urged that this Court may be pleased to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, Sri K. Sandeep, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigative process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioner. The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released, the Petitioner may exert undue influence upon, or intimidate, prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiating the evidentiary foundation of the case. It is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. Thoughtful consideration is bestowed on the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for both sides. I have perused the entire record. 7. In the light of the case of the prosecution and the contentions of the learned Counsel for both the sides, now the point for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” 8. As seen from the record, after thorough investigation, the charge sheet was filed within 180 days of the judicial custody of the Petitioner. The Petitioner was arrested on 09.08.2025 and has been in judicial custody for the past 316 days. It is alleged that the Petitioner was found in possession and 4 transportation of 24.7 kgs of ganja. It is a commercial quantity. There are 13 similar adverse antecedents reported against the Petitioner, one among them being an NDPS case. The learned Sessions Judge has observed that the Petitioner is a rowdy-sheeter and was externed. Charges have also been framed and the case is coming up for fixing the trial schedule. The learned Sessions Judge has further mentioned that the case has been identified for early disposal. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the Petitioner on bail. The Petitioner is required to wait at least until the material witnesses and other witnesses are examined by the prosecution before the learned Sessions Judge. 10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 18.06.2026 DSV 5 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4681/2026 Date: 18.06.2026 DSV 6 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE No: CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4681/2026 PROCEEDING SHEET SL. NO. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE 18.06.2026 Dr.YLR, J The Criminal Petition is dismissed. (Vide separate order) ________ Dr.YLR, J DSV 7 SL. NO. DATE ORDER OFFICE NOTE