Strict adherence to bail provisions under the NDPS Act requires substantial evidence against the accused and consideration of ongoing investigations and public safety.

ORDER:

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.6 on bail in Crime No.3 of 2025 of Chillakur Police Station, SPSR Nellore District registered against the petitioners/Accused No.6 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’).

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.01.2025 at 17.45 hours, on receipt of reliable information about illegal transportation of ganja, the Sub Inspector of Police, Chillakur Police Station, along with staff and mediators proceeded to near Ramalayam Temple, Kadivedu Centre towards Kota road, found Accused Nos.1 to 4 in possession of 72 Kgs of ganja. On interrogation, the accused revealed that they received the said ganja from Accused Nos.5 to 8. A case has been registered against the accused. The police arrested the petitioner/Accused No.6 on 29.04.2025 in Crime N.161 of 2025 of Jangareddigudem Police Station on PT warrant.

3. Mr.P.Nagendra Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.6, 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 undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was arrested on 29.04.2025 on PT warrant in Crime No.161 of 2025 of Jangareddigudem Police Station. No contraband was seized from the possession of the petitioner herein. Basing on the confession of other accused, the police arrested the petitioner herein on PT warrant and it is urged to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.6 on bail.

4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed grant of bail to the petitioner/Accused No.6 and submitted that investigation is still pending and other co-accused are yet to be apprehended. She further submits that there is one adverse antecedent against the petitioner and it is urged to dismiss the bail petition.

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

6. As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.6 is that he has allegedly indulged in transportation of 72 Kgs of ganja which is a commercial quantity. The petitioner was arrested on 16.06.2026 on execution of PT warrant. Of course, based on the confession given by Accused No.5, the petitioner/Accused No.6 was arraigned as accused. As seen from the records, the petitioner is the main supplier of the contraband. There is one adverse antecedent reported against the petitioner as per the submission of learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Investigation is still pending. Accused Nos.9 to 11 are yet to be apprehended. A learned Single Judge of this Court in CrlP.No.4937 of 2025 on 09.05.2025 enlarged Accused Nos.7 and 8 on bail. This Court enlarged Accused No.5 on bail vide orders dated 15.07.2025 in Crl.P.No.6986 of 2025. However, the allegations against the petitioner herein are altogether different when compare to the allegations leveled against Accused No.5. Hence, the principle of parity cannot be extended to the present petitioner.

7. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the petitioner’s alleged role played in the case and also the investigation is at progressive stage, enlarging the petitioner on bail would cause serious impediment to the investigation. The petitioner had allegedly supplied 72 Kgs of ganja which is a commercial quantity. Learned Assistant Government Pleader vehemently opposed grant of bail. This Court is not satisfied