Vantala Panthulu Babu Alias Gautam 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 No.2 on bail in Cr.No.63 of 2025 of Biccavole Police Station, East Godavari District, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).

The case of the prosecution is that on 07.04.2025 at about 11:00 hours, on receipt of credible information regarding illegal possession and transportation of ganja, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Biccavole Police Station, along with his staff and mediators, proceeded to a vacant site near Government House Sites Layout-2, beside the Biccavole-Sitarama Tank Bund Road, and conducted vehicle checking. The police apprehended Accused No.1 while he was found in possession of 21.080 Kgs of ganja in a plastic bag. The contraband, along with a vehicle and a mobile phone, was seized under the cover of a mediators’ report. Based on the said report, it was revealed that Accused No.2 had handed over the ganja to Accused No.1. Accused No.1 was arrested on 07.04.2025, and Accused No.2 was arrested on 08.04.2025. During interrogation, both Accused Nos.1 and 2 confessed that the contraband was procured at the instance of Accused Nos.3 and 4.

Sri 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 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 submissions, 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 submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.

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

As seen from the record, the petitioner/Accused No.2 was arrested on 08.04.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 143 days. He was allegedly indulged in dealing with 21.080 Kgs of ganja. After the investigation was completed, the police filed a charge sheet. All the witnesses of the prosecution are official witnesses. Hence, the question of the petitioner influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation may not arise. The petitioner/Accused No.2 is a resident of Avatala Veedhi, K.Pedabayalu Village, G.Madugula Mandal, ASR District. The petitioner has got fixed abode. This Court in Crl.P.No.7696 of 2025 vide order dated 28.08.2025, granted bail to Accused No.1. This Court in Crl.P.No.7897 of 2025 vide order dated 30.08.2025, granted bail to Accused Nos.3 and 4.

Considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner/Accused No.2 in judicial custody for the past 143 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 No.2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Sessions Judge for Trial of the Cases under the NDPS Act-Cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajamahendravaram.

ii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every adjournment.

iii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the learned Trial Court.

iv. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.

v. The petitioner/Accused No.2 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.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.