Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7481 (AP)

Pangi Chittibabu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

CRLP/6534/2026 · 2026-08-06

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010399382026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY, THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6534/2026 Between: PANGI CHITTIBABU, S/O. MUSURU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, KOTAGUNNALU VILLAGE, KUDUMASARIK PANCHAYATI, CHINTAPALLI MANDAL, ALLURI SEETHARAJU DISTRICT AADHAR NO. 269824291269 ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.6534 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 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.1 on bail in Crime No.04 of 2026 of Annavaram Police Station, ASR District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 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.Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the Petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. He has not committed any offence. He is a law-abiding citizen. He has got fixed abode. He is the sole breadwinner of his family. 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, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that, though the charge sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the petitioner are well founded. Hence, he prayed that the Criminal Petition be dismissed. 3 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.6534 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 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 is arrayed as Accused No.1. The petitioner was arrested on 09.02.2026 and has been in judicial custody for the past 186 days. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had indulged in the possession and transportation of 308.00 Kgs of ganja, which is not only a commercial quantity but also a colossal quantity. After thorough investigation, the charge sheet has been filed within 180 days. 6. 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. 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. 1(1999) 9 SCC 429 2(1990) 1 SCC 95 4 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.6534 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 9. 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 and Durand Didier, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered at this juncture inasmuch as there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner has not indulged in the commission of the alleged offence. 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:07.08.2026 RSI 5 Dr.YLR,J Crl.P.No.6534 of 2026 Dated 07.08.2026 70 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6534 of 2026 Date: 07.08.2026 RSI