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 Petitioners/A-6 & 7 on bail pending trial in Crime No.89/2025 of V. Madugula Police Station, and pass

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS by the petitioners/A.6 and A.7 seeking grant of regular bail in Crime No.89 of 2025 on the file of V. Madugula Police Station, Anakapalli District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 read with Section 8(c) of the NDPS Act.

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.08.2025, the petitioners along with other accused were found transporting 320 kilograms of ganja on motorcycles and were apprehended while in possession of the contraband.

Heard Sri Arrabolu Sai Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mrs. K. Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 18.08.2025 and the statutory period for completion of investigation has already expired. It is contended that the grounds of arrest were not served on the petitioners in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the principal allegations relating to procurement and transportation of ganja are attributed to A.1 to A.3, whereas the present petitioners were only engaged as labourers. According to the learned counsel, there is no specific material collected during the course of investigation to establish any conspiracy involving the petitioners, and except vague and omnibus allegations, no concrete evidence is available against them.

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, while opposing the petition, submits that though the grounds of arrest bearing the signatures of the petitioners are placed on record, they do not disclose the date and time of service. It is further submitted that even as per the remand report, there is clear indication of proper communication of the grounds of arrest. The quantity of contraband involved in present crime is 320 Kgs of Ganja, which is a commercial quantity. However, it is contended that in view of the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the petitioners are not entitled to bail.

Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed before this Court, it is an admitted fact that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 18.08.2025 and that the statutory period for filing the charge sheet has expired. On a perusal of the case diary and materials available, this Court is unable to record such satisfaction at this stage. However, the allegations against the petitioners relate to possession and transportation of a commercial quantity of ganja, i.e., 320 kilograms, thereby attracting the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Rajesh, (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 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 enforced the law in the spirit intended by Parliament.

19. Section 37 imposes additional, overriding restrictions on the grant of bail, beyond those under 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 guilty. If either condition is not fulfilled, the bar against granting bail applies.

20.Th