Under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail cannot be granted unless the court records a finding that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty, which is a mandatory requirement overriding general bail provisions.

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 Courtmay be pleased to grant an anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused no.3 in connection with Crime No. 27 of 2025 on the file of the SHO, Munchingiput police Station, Alluri Sitharamaraju District to release the Petitioner/Accused No.3 in the event of his arrest to meet end s of justice.

ORDER:

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Narik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner/Accused No. 3 in connection with Crime No. 27 of 2025 on the file of the Station House Officer, Munchingiput Police Station, Alluri Sitharamaraju District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 25 read with Section 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.05.2025, Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were caught red-handed while transporting 350 kilograms of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that the present petitioner (Accused No. 3) had placed an order with Accused Nos. 1 and 2 for supply of ganja. Acting upon the said order, Accused Nos. 1 and 2 procured and transported the contraband and were apprehended. Subsequently, they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

3. Heard Sri Dr. Majji Suribabu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the implication of the petitioner is solely based on the alleged confession statements of Accused Nos. 1 and 2. It is further submitted that certain handwritten words in the mediators’ report create suspicion regarding its genuineness. The learned counsel also relied upon a recent judgment in Raman Sahni vs. State of U.P., to contend that anticipatory bail is maintainable even in cases involving offences under the NDPS Act.

5. Per contra, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the petition, contending that the alleged discrepancies in the mediators’ report cannot be examined at this stage. It is submitted that the case involves commercial quantity of ganja and that the petitioner is a key conspirator, acting as receiver and seller in the illegal trafficking network. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed showing the petitioner as absconding and that his custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the conspiracy. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor also relied upon the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

6. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation that the petitioner absconded is incorrect.

7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor also relied upon the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Rajesh¹(2020) 12 SCC 122 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 justi