Sayyed Rehan @ Munna,, S/O. Jilani vs State Of Andhra Pradesh

Dr Y. Lakshmana Rao, J

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’)/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused on bail in Cr.No.250 of 2025 of P.M.Palem Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, registered against the petitioner/Accused herein for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).

The case of the prosecution is that on 26.04.2025, on receipt of credible information about the illegal possession and transportation of Ganja, The Sub-Inspector of Police, P.M.Palem Police Station, secured the presence of mediators and rushed to BABA Engineering College Road, P.M.Palem, Visakhapatnam. The police noticed one person standing with a carry bag in his hands and on seeing the police, the said person tried to escape. The Sub-Inspector of Police along with his staff apprehended the accused. During investigation, the accused gave his address particulars, and basing on the said confession statement, only 1.250 Kgs of Ganja was seized under the cover of mediator’s report. Basing on the report, the petitioner was arrested on 26.04.2025 and remanded him to judicial custody.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

Mr. Balabhadruni Manohar, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his continued incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.

Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, 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. In view of the foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.

As seen from the record, the petitioner/Accused was indulged in transportation and possession of 1.250 kgs of ganja, the same was reflected in the mediators' report vide dated 26.04.2025. The petitioner/Accused was arrested on 26.04.2025. He has been in the judicial custody for the past 94 days. Albeit the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are seven adverse antecedents against the petitioner/Accused, those are all not pertaining to the provisions of the NDPS Act. Material portion of investigation is completed. All the witnesses of the prosecution are official witnesses. The question of petitioner influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation may not arise. Hence, the request of the petitioner for grant of bail is reasonable.

Considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner in the judicial custody for the past 94 days, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioner, and his alleged role played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions:

i. The petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XVI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bheemunipatnam.

ii. The petitioner/Accused shall appear before the Station House Officer, P.M.Palem Police Station, Visakhapatnam Commissionerate, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court.

iii. The petitioner/Accused shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.

iv. The petitioner/Accused shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.

v. The petitioner/Accused shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required.

vi. The petitioner/Accused 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 or to any police officer.

vii. The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.