##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:33029 APHC010143392026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3396]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2187/2026 Between:

1.YENDURTI AKHIL, S/O.GOVIND, AGED ABT 20 YEARS,R/O.CHAMMACHINTA VILLAGE PANCHAYAT,NATHAVARAM

MANDAL, ANAKAPALLLI DISTRCT.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SHO, Koyyuru P.S., ASR District, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra

Pradeshat Amaravati, Guntur District.

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS

praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to enlarge the Petitioner/ A2 on Regular Bail in respect to the Crime No.50/2025 on the file of Koyyum P.S,

ASR District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

1.ANAND KUMAR KOCHIRI Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

2

2026:APHC:33029

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2187 of 2026

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner/Accused No.2, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.50 of 2025 of Koyyuru Police Station, Alluri Sitharma Raju District, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 111(2)(b) BNS and Section 20 (b)(ii)(c), 25 r/w 8(c)of the Narcotic

Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. None represented for the petitioner. The petitioner herein is the Accused No.2, who has been in judicial custody since 21.11.2025. Since this is a regular bail application, this Court is inclined to proceed with the matter as

the right and liberty of the individual is involved.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that A.1 was found in possession of 37.00 Kgs of Ganja while he was transporting the same by a Car and on the

confession statement of A.1, case is lodged against the petitioner/A.2.

4. Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the contraband involved in the present case is a commercial quantity of 37.00 kilograms of Ganja. It is further contended that, to connect the petitioner/A.2 with the crime, reliance is placed on call data records and that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 21.10.2025. She would further submit that the statutory period has not

3

yet been completed and that the investigation is still pending. Learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor therefore prayed for dismissal of the petition.

5. Considering the submissions and a fair look on the material placed before this Court, it is a case involving 37.00 Kgs of Ganja, which is a commercial quantity. The statutory period is not yet completed and the investigation is still pending. At this juncture, this Court is not inclined to

release the petitioner on bail.

6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Rajesh, 2026:APHC:33029 at Paragraph

Nos.8, 19, 20 and 21 held as under:

8. To curb the spread of dangerous drugs, Parliament has mandated that an accused under the NDPS Act cannot be granted bail unless there are reasonable grounds to believe he is not guilty and will not commit offences while on bail. The High Court failed to justify ignoring these mandatory conditions when releasing the accused. Instead of considering the grave socio-economic and health consequences of illegal drug trafficking, the court ought to

have enforcedthelaw inthespirit intendedby Parliament.

19. Section 37 imposes additional, overriding restrictions on the grant of bail, beyond thoseunder Section 439 CrPC, through its non obstante clause. It prohibits bail unless two mandatory conditions are met: the prosecution is given an opportunity to oppose, and the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not g