High CourtsSingle Bench

Deepak Ranjan Dhal vs State Of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh High Court · Decided on 27 June 2025 · Citation: (2025) 06 AP CK 0158

HON’BLE JUDGES
T.C.D. Sekhar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 482 · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8(C), 20(b)(ii)(C)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No: 5450 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 459 words

T.C.D. Sekhar, J

The Court made the following order:

1.

The present Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, by the petitioner/Accused No.2 for granting of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.128 of 2024 of Salur Rural Police Station, Parvathipuram Manyam District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) read with 8(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).

2.

It is the Case of the prosecution is that on 24.09.2024, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Salur Rual Police Station, on receipt of credible information, after securing the mediators, rushed to outskirts of Jeegaram Village and started checking the vehicles on NH-26 road. The police noticed one person coming on motor cycle from P.Konvavalasa towards Salur. Following him another person was coming behind in Scooty with two bags. On seeing the police, the two persons tried to escape. Thereafter, the Police apprehended one person and other person escaped from the scene of offence. On the confession statement made by the Accused No.1, the petitioner is added as Accused No.2 in the instant Crime.

3.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner/Accused No.2 was falsely implicated in the said crime on the confession made by Accused No.1. He would further submit that he was not present at the scene of offence and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the police. He would further submit that the petitioner is the only breadwinner of his family, and he requested to allow the present Criminal Petition.

4.

Per contra, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is a resident of Pottangi Village, Koraput District, Odisha State, and in the event of his release, it is very difficult to secure his presence. He would further submit that the investigation is not yet completed.

5.

Having considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel, this Court is inclined to allow the present Criminal Petition with the following conditions:

i) In the event of arrest of the petitioner/A-2, he shall be enlarged on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of the Salur Rural Police Station, Parvathipuram Manyam District.

ii) The petitioner/A-2 shall make himself available before the investigating officer as and when required;

iii) The petitioner/A-2 shall not cause any threat, inducement or make any promise to the prosecution witnesses;

iv) The petitioner/A-2 shall appear before the concerned Police Station, once in a month on any Sunday, till filing of the charge sheet.

6.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.