ORDER:

The present Criminal Petition is filed praying this Court to grant pre arrest bail to the petitioners who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2 in COR.No.250 of 2024 before the Prohibition and Excise SHO, Kothakota, Wanaparthy District.

2. The brief facts of the case are The Prohibition and Excise Office in Kothakota received an anonymous phone call on December 8, 2024, at 10:10 PM, from an unidentified person using mobile number 9849919925. The caller alleged that petitioner No.2, a licensed T.F.T. vendor, was selling adulterated toddy at his shop in Sugoor village, Pebbai Mandal, Wanaparthy District. Acting on this information, the Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspector of Kothakota, accompanied by two panchas, Amarachintha Shanthanna and G. Balram Goud, visited the T.F.T. shop on December 11, 2024, at 3:45 PM. They met petitioner No.1, the vendor and mother of petitioner No.2, who showed them the license copy issued by the District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Wanaparthy District. During the inspection, the authorities observed 15 plastic crates containing 12 bottles of 650ml toddy each. They also found three ingredients on the shelf, namely yeast, white powder, and white paste, which were marked as M1, M2, and M3, respectively. The authorities then tested the toddy using prescribed chemicals and found it to be free from Chloral Hydrate Adulteration. However, on suspicion, the authorities drew three sealed samples of toddy bottles, each containing 350ml, along with the yeast, white powder, and white paste samples. These samples were sent to the Regional Prohibition and Excise Laboratory, Hyderabad, for chemical analysis. A crime occurrence report was registered against Petitioners No. 1 and 2 under Section 27(1) of the Telangana Excise Act and Rule 12 of the Telangana Excise Rules, 2007. The chemical analysis report from the laboratory, received on December 18, 2024, revealed that the toddy was adulterated with Alprazalam. Consequently, an alteration memo was filed before the trial Court on January 17, 2025, and the charges against the petitioners were altered to Section 8(c) read with Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. Aggrieved thereby, this Criminal Petition is filed.

3. Heard Sri DV Krishna Kumar, learned counsel for petitioners, and Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners, a mother-son duo, are poor and innocent toddy tappers who have been falsely implicated in the case by Prohibition and Excise officials for statistical purposes. He contended that the petitioners have not committed any offence and that the allegations against them are baseless. He asserted that no contraband was seized from the petitioners, and although the chemical report revealed the presence of Alprazolam in the toddy, it did not specify the quantity, which is essential to determine the applicability of Section 8 read with Section 22 of the NDPS Act. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioners and the investigation in the case is not yet completed and if enlarged on anticipatory bail, they will likely resume their activities, and that they may also intimidate witnesses, tamper with evidence, and continue committing offences, thereby undermining the investigation and judicial process. Therefore, 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 primary contention of learned counsel for petitioners is that the petitioners are entitled for the relief of anticipatory bail as no contraband was seized from