O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioners – Accused Nos.4 and 5 in Crime Crime No.27 of 2022 on the file of Shahalibanda Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with 22(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the Act’), seeking bail.

2. Prosecution alleges that on 11.02.2022 at 21.00 hours, on credible information, the Sub-Inspector of Police along with his staff proceeded to Nagulchinta X Roads, found A1 and A2 under suspicious circumstances, and on search, they seized 63 grams of Heroine from the possession of A1 and 3 grams of Heroine from the possession of A2, and further, basing on the confession of A1, police have apprehended A3 to A5 and seized 3 grams of Heroine each from their possession under a cover of panchanama.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. T. Anirudh Reddy, submits that the petitioners are alleged to have committed the offence under Section 8(c) read with 22(b) of the Act. He submits that even as per the remand report, the petitioners have purchased 3 grams of heroine each only for their personal consumption and as such, the alleged offences are not attracted, at best, Section 27 of the Act attracts. He submits that even the contraband that is seized from the possession of the petitioners is 3 grams each, which is less than the commercial quantity and the punishment for the alleged offence is one year. Learned counsel submits that as per Section 64-A of the Act, there is immunity from prosecution to addicts volunteering for treatment. Section 64-A of the Act reads as under; “Any addict, who is charged with an offence punishable under Section 27 or with offences involving small quantity of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, who voluntarily seeks to undergo medical treatment for de-addiction from a hospital or an institution maintained or recognized by the Government or a local authority and undergoes such treatment shall not be liable to prosecution under Section 27 or under any other section for offences involving small quantity of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.

Provided that the said immunity from prosecution may be withdrawn if the addict does not undergo to complete treatment for de-addiction”

Learned counsel submits that even under Section 39 of the Act also, the Court has power to release certain offenders on probation. Section

39 of the Act reads as under;

“When any addict is found guilty of an offence punishable under Section 27 (or for offences relating to small quantity of any narcotic drug and psychotropic substance) and if the Court by which he is found guilty is of the opinion, regard being had to the age, character, antecedents or physical or mental condition of the offender, that it is expedient so to do, then, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, the Court may, instead of sentencing him at once to any imprisonment, with his consent, direct that he be released for undergoing medical treatment for de-toxification or de-addiction from a hospital or an institution maintained or recognized by Government and on his entering into a bond in the form prescribed by the Central Government, with or without sureties, to appear and furnish before the Court within a period not exceeding one year, a report regarding the result of his medical treatment and, in the meantime, to abstain from the commission of any offence under Chapter IV.

(2) If it appears to the Court, having regard to the report regarding the result of the medical treatment furnished under sub- section (1), that it is expedient so to do, the Court may direct the release of the offender after due admonition on his entering into a bond in the form prescribed by the Central Government, with or without sureties, for abstaining from the commission of any offence under Chapter IV during such period not exceeding three years as the Court m