APHC010347012026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE 17th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5573/2026 Between: 1. VEERAVALLI DURGA RAO ALIAS PRASAD, S/O MURTHY, AGED 30 YEARS,R/O RAJA RATNAM STREET, MANDAPETA VILLAGE MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2. KORRA BONJUBABU, S/O GANGANNA, AGED 50 YEARS,R/O VANNADA VILLAGE, GOMANGI POST,PEDABAYALU MANDAL, ASR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradeshat Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): DASARI RAMAKOTESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5573 of 2026 Dated 17.07.2026 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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 & 5 on bail in Crime No.22 of 2026 of Nathavaram Police Station, Anakapalli District, registered against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 & 5 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Mr.D.Rama Koteswara Rao, the learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. They have not committed any offence. They are law-abiding citizens. They have got fixed abode. The Petitioners undertake to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail to the Petitioners. Hence, it is urged to allow the petition. 3. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners and submitted that, though the charge sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the petitioners are well founded. Hence, she prayed that the Criminal Petition be dismissed. 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5573 of 2026 Dated 17.07.2026 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. As seen from the record, the petitioners are arrayed as Accused Nos.4 and 5. After thorough investigation, the charge sheet has been filed, and the same has been numbered as NDPS S.C.No.267 of 2026. The petitioners were arrested on the spot. Of course, there are no adverse antecedents reported against the petitioners. The petitioners were arrested on 23.02.2026 and have been in judicial custody for the past 146 days. It is alleged by the prosecution that the petitioners were in conscious possession and transportation of 168.00 kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. 6. 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. 7. In Union of India v. Ram Samujh1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court at Paragraph No.7 observed that narcotic offences have a grave and far- reaching impact on society, destroying numerous lives. The Court further held that drug traffickers pose a continuing threat to society and, therefore, the statutory restrictions must be strictly enforced. 1(1999) 9 SCC 429 4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5573 of 2026 Dated 17.07.2026 8. In Durand 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. 9. The Hon’ble Apex Court in State 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. 10. 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 Didier and Rajesh, the request of the petitioners cannot be considered at this juncture inasmuch as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioners have not indulged in the commission of the alleged offence.There are no merits in this case for grant of bail to the petitioners. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 11. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. 2(1990) 1 SCC 95 3(2020) 12 SCC 122 5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5573 of 2026 Dated 17.07.2026 As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date:17.07.2026 RSI 6 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.5573 of 2026 Dated 17.07.2026 76 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5573 of 2026 Date: 17.07.2026 RSI