Bail under the NDPS Act is non-bailable for commercial quantities unless reasonable grounds for innocence are established; the court found no such grounds.

ORDER:

The present Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.3 in Crime No.1356 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20 (b) (ii) (c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) before the Meerpet Police Station, Rachakonda, on bail.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.11.2024, at 14:30 hours, a credible tip-off was received about individuals transporting and selling Ganja, a narcotic substance, from Injapur via Turkayamjal to Gurramguda in a blue-colored Baleno car with registration number TS 31 G 0459. The information was promptly shared with the superior Officer under Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, and a General Diary entry was made. Investigation revealed that accused A-1 and petitioner had rented the Baleno car from Automotive Sagar Complex on November 28, 2024, at 11:50 hours. They then traveled to Mangampadu in Alluri District, where they purchased 36 packets of Ganja, each weighing approximately 2 kilograms, totaling 72 kilograms. The substance was concealed in three plastic bags. The petitioner, along with A.1, A2 and A4, were found to be in contact with each other solely through WhatsApp calls. After purchasing the Ganja, A-1 and petitioner began their journey back to Hyderabad, arriving on November 29, 2024. On November 30, 2024, at around 16:00 hours, A-1 left his residence to meet A-2 and petitioner on ZP Road, Meerpet, to facilitate the transportation of the Ganja to Maharashtra. However, he was apprehended by the authorities while en route. Thereafter, a case was registered against the petitioner for the offences as alleged. Aggrieved thereby, this criminal petition is filed.

3. Heard Sri Rathan Singh, learned counsel for petitioner, and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has no connection whatsoever to the drugs that were seized in the case. He further submitted that no contraband was found in the possession of petitioner, which raises serious doubts about his involvement in the alleged offence. He averred that the investigation into the matter has been completed, and yet, the petitioner remains in judicial custody. He contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case, and his detention is unwarranted. He asserted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of their family, with a fixed residence and properties, and his continued incarceration is causing undue hardship to their loved ones. He averred that this Court has already granted bail to A2 and requested this Court to grant the same relief to the petitioner. Therefore, prayed this Court to allow the criminal petition, granting the relief of bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the case revolves around transport of drugs and that as per the complaint averments, the petitioner is actively involved in the alleged transportation of drugs and that the investigation of the case is yet to be completed. Therefore, while highlighting the seriousness of the offence and the need to prevent the petitioner from absconding or tampering with evidence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is falsely implicated in the case and he has nothing to do with the alleged transport of contraband. As per the submissions, the primary ground urged for grant of bail to this petitioner is that this Court has already granted the relief of bail to accused No.2 in the case. However, this Court observes that the accused No.2 was granted bail in view of pregnancy of hi