APHC010356562026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 27th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5740/2026 Between: 1. LILIU PRADHAN, ,S/O. SUBASHA PRADHAN, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,R/O. BEGUNIAPADA, KODALA, GANJAM DISTRICT,ODISHA STATE. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1. BOOSARA V N PRAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 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 on bail in Crime No.165 of 2026 of 2 Kancharapalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). 2. Mr.B.V.N.Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence. He is a law-abiding citizen. He has got fixed abode. The Petitioner undertakes to abide by any conditions that this Court may impose while granting bail. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petition. 3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. Hence, it is urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 5. On perusal of the record, the allegation against the Petitioner/Accused is that he was found in possession and transportation of 4 kgs of ganja. The 3 Petitioner was arrested on 18.06.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 39 days only. So far, only five witnesses have been examined. The investigation is not yet completed, and some more crucial witnesses are to be examined. There is one similar antecedent reported against the Petitioner vide Cr.No.930 of 2024 of Railway Police Station, Nagpur. 6. In the present case, the Petitioner has not disclosed in the petition the pendency of the previous antecedents against him, though the same are reflected in the remand report. 7. In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Zeba Khan v. State of U.P.,1, wherein, at Paragraph Nos. 47 and 48, it was observed that bail applications are often considered on the basis of prima facie material placed before the Court at different stages of the proceedings. The Court held that non-disclosure of material facts, such as criminal antecedents, prior bail rejections, custody period, and the stage of trial, may result in an erroneous grant or refu sal of bail. It was further held that every bail applicant is under an obligation to disclose all material particulars, including criminal antecedents and any coercive processes pending against him, duly supported by an affidavit. Such disclosure is necessary to ensure transparency, uniformity, and integrity in bail adjudication. 1 2026 SCC Online 188 4 8. The revised Standing Order No.282(1) of the High Court of the Andhra Pradesh stated in every application for bail presented to the High Court, the Petitioner shall state whether similar application has or has not been made to the Supreme Court, and if made shall state the result thereof. The petitioner/applicant shall also mention whether he/she is/was involved in any other criminal case or not. If yes, particulars and decisions thereof. An application which does not contain this information shall be placed before the bench with the necessary information. 9. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Zeba Khan supra, the request of the Petitioner cannot be considered at this juncture inasmuch as the investigation is at crucial stage. There are no merits in this case for grant of bail to the Petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Petition is liable to be dismissed. 10. 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:27.07.2026 PRA 5 19 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5740 of 2026 Date: 27.07.2026 PRA