APHC010283382026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4566/2026 Between: KILLO RAMAKRISHNA, S/O.APPARAO,AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,R/O.TAPARPALLI VILLAGE, CHINTAPALLY MANDAL ASR DSTRICT, AP. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, ,Through Station House Officer,Prohilpition and Excise Station,Nelloip-II, SPSR Nellore DistrictRep., by its Public Prosecutor,High court af Amaravathi. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.4566 of 2026 Dated 19.06.2026 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.6 on bail in Crime No.16 of 2023 of Nellore-II SEB Police Station, Nellore SEB District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.6herein for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C)of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he hasbeen falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has not committed any offence. He is law-abiding citizen. Hehas got fixed abode. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioner.Hence, it is urged to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is not completed. Some more material witnesses are to be examined. The petitioner has indulged in possession and transportation of commercial quantity of Ganja. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the petition. 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.4566 of 2026 Dated 19.06.2026 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. As seen from the record, the petitioner was arrayed as Accused No.6. His role came to light based on the confession of the other accused. The allegation against the petitioner is that he supplied 24.00 kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. There are no similar adverse antecedents reported against the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested on 11.04.2026 and has been in judicial custody for the past 69 days. 6. Accused Nos.1 to 4 were arrested and released on bail. However, Accused Nos.5, 7 and 8 are still absconding. So far, only eleven witnesses have been examined. Some more material witnesses are yet to be examined. Not even a substantial portion of the trial has been completed. The crime is of the year 2023. Therefore, the request of the petitioner for enlargement on bail is not found convincing or reasonable at this juncture. 7. Further, statutory period of judicial remand for 180 days is also not completed. In this connection, it is relevant to refer the following decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. 8. InUnion of India v. Ram Samujh1,the Hon’ble Supreme Courtat Paragraph No.7observed that narcotic offences have a grave and far- reaching impact on society, destroying numerous lives. The Court further 1(1999) 9 SCC 429 4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.4566 of 2026 Dated 19.06.2026 held that drug traffickers pose a continuing threat to society and, therefore, the statutory restrictions must be strictly enforced. 9. InDurand Didier v. State (UT of Goa)2,the Hon’ble Apex Court at Paragraph No.24,observed that illicit trafficking of narcotic drugs has become a serious social menace, particularly affecting the youth. The Court further noted that, in view of its devastating impact on society, Parliament enacted stringent provisions under the NDPS Act to effectively combat the menace. 10. The Hon’ble Apex Court inState of Kerala v. Rajesh3,at Paragraph Nos.8, 19, 20 and 21,held that bail under the NDPS Act can be granted only upon strict compliance with the mandatory conditions prescribed under Section 37. The Court further observed that "reasonable grounds" require substantial material showing that the accused is not guilty, and recording such a finding is a sine qua non for grant of bail. 11. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ram Samujh, Durand Didierand Rajesh,the request of the petitioner cannot be considered at this juncture inasmuch as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitionerhas not indulged in the commission of the alleged offence.There are no merits in this case for grant of bail to the petitioner. Hence, thisCriminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 2(1990) 1 SCC 95 3(2020) 12 SCC 122 5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.4566 of 2026 Dated 19.06.2026 12. 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:19.06.2026 RSI 6 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.4566 of 2026 Dated 19.06.2026 282 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4566 of 2026 Date: 19.06.2026 RSI