APHC010414362026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY, THE 17th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6816/2026 Between: 1. JAJULA RAVINDRA, S/O RAMU AGE 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 7-11-20, PANTHULUGARIMEDA GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM 2. GUDIVADA VENKATA SAI MANISH, S/O UMA SENKHAR,AGE 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 2-25-22, HINDI VILLAGE BHPV POST, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. SUDHA RAGHURAM, S/O BASKHARA RAO AGE 28 YEARS, R/O P.NO. 2-2-24, ATM LINE HINDI VILLAGE BHPV POST, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. APPIKONDA YADAV KISHORE, S/O DURGA RAO, AGE 30 YEARS, R/O UVARNA DURGA APARTEMENT,NEAR TEMPANY SCHOOL, OPP APOLLO MEDICAL SHOP VUDA COLONY, PEDAGANTYADA, GAJUWAKA, VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, through Station House officer,Gajuwaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam Rep. by Public Prosecutor ,High Court at Amaravati. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S): 1. RAMINENI SUDHEER Counsel for the Respondent/complainant: 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2 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.1 to 4 on bail in Crime No.283 of 2026 of Gajuwaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam, 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.Ramineni Sudheer, the learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and they have been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the Petitioners are the sole earning members of the family and, therefore, their incarceration would cause undue hardship to their dependents. The Petitioners undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 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 Petitioners. He submits that the investigation is still at a nascent stage and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioners are released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that they 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 Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record. 3 5. On perusal of the record, the allegations against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 are that they indulged in dealing with 6 kgs of Ganja. It is alleged that they are consumers of Ganja. The Petitioners were arrested on 25.07.2026. They have been in judicial custody for the past 23 days. The Petitioners are permanent residents of Visakhapatnam. They have got fixed abode. So far, five witnesses have been examined. Substantial portion of the investigation is completed. 6. In respect of Petitioner No.4/Accused No.4, there exists one similar adverse antecedent in Cr.No.408 of 2022 of IV Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam, which was not disclosed in the present petition. 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 refusal 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. 12026 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. In the instant case, this Court is not convinced that if Petitioner No.4/Accused No.4 is enlarged on bail, he would refrain from committing any offence in future. Though the seized contraband is not of commercial quantity, at this juncture this Court is of the considered opinion that enlarging Petitioner No.4/Accused No.4 on bail would result in tampering with evidence and hampering the investigation. Therefore, the request of Petitioner No.4/Accused No.4 at this stage is not found convincing or reasonable. 10. Accordingly, the petition, insofar as it relates to Petitioner No.4/Accused No.4, is dismissed. 11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3, this Court is inclined to enlarge Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 on bail, subject to the following stringent conditions. 5 i. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall be enlarged on bail subject to their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned III Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam. ii. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet. iii. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required. vi. The Petitioner Nos.1 to 3/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court. 12. In the result, the Criminal Petition is partly allowed. ________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 17.08.2026 PRA 6 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6816 of 2026 Date: 17.08.2026 PRA