ORDER:

Accused Nos.4 & 5 in Crime No.774 of 2021 of Nagarampalem Police Station, Guntur Urban, Guntur District, filed this Criminal Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, seeking regular bail.

2. The case of the prosecution, as per mediators report, is that on 11.12.2021 in the evening, on credible information when the raid party reached scene of occurrence, that A1 to A5 are exchanging packets from one car to another car bearing Nos AP 26 BR 3618 and MH 03 AR 9987; that on seeing the raid party all the person ran away and on that raid party chased the persons running and caught hold of three persons namely Kurra Venkatesh (A3), Ishaq Waman Jore Shaik(A4) and Mohammad Ishan (A5). After adhering to the required formalities under the Act, the persons informed the CI of police that they purchased Ganja and the changing the contraband into another car. Later the statements of A3 to A4 were recorded. Total 47.50 kgs of Ganja was seized from them apart from Phones and vehicles. A1 and A2 absconded from that place. Police registered crime for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, against the petitioners and others. A3 to A5 were produced before Hon’ble Magistrate of I class Special Mobile Court, Guntur and they were remanded to Judicial Custody on

12-12-2021.

3. Heard Sri Habibulla Shaik, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners are in custody since more than 180 days. As charge sheet is not filed till date, the petitioners are entitled for default bail under Section 167 Cr.P.C. It is also contended that when such application was moved before the Trial Court, the learned Trial Court returned the application on the ground that charge sheet was filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further contend that charge sheet filed by police was returned. Mere filing of defective charge sheet does not amount to filing of charge sheet/final report as per Sec 173 Cr.P.C.

Thus, prayed to enlarge the petitioners on regular bail.

5. Learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition. He would contend that charge sheet was filed before the statutory period of 180 days and, however, the same was returned with some technical objections. The return of the charge sheet is only for certain compliances and police are complying those objections. Thus, it will not entitle the petitioner to get default bail. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

6. Perused the material on record and I have given my anxious consideration to the facts of the case, material therein and to the contentions of the both the counsel.

7. Whether charge sheet, returned, would amount to filing of final report/charge sheet under Sec 173 Cr.P.C?

8. It is appropriate to have a look at Section 36(A) of the NDPS Act, which reads thus:

36A. Offences triable by Special Courts.4 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),4 (a) all offences under this Act which are punishable with imprisonment for a term of more than three years shall be triable only by the Special Court constituted for the area in which the offence has been committed or where there are more Special Courts than one for such area, by such one of them as may be specified in this behalf by the Government;

(b) where a person accused of or suspected of the commission of an offence under this Act is forwarded to a Magistrate under sub- section (2) or sub-section (2A) of section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), such Magistrate may authorise the detention of such person in such custody as he thinks fit for a period not exceeding fifteen days in the whole where such Magistrate is a Judicial Magistrate and seven days in the whole where such Magistrate is an Executive Magistrate: Provided t