SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 15910

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J. SREENIVAS RAO, J
K. V. RATNAKAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF TELANGANA – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9373 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sujith Jaiswal
For the Respondents: Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon

Anticipatory bail granted subject to cooperation with the investigation, considering the minor quantity and absence of prior criminal record.

Headnote:The petition under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 seeks anticipatory bail for accused No.4 in a drug-related offense. The petitioner claims false implication, as the seized contraband was attributed to another accused. The court, after reviewing the submissions and facts, notes the absence of prior criminal records against the petitioner and the minor quantity involved, leading to a directive for cooperation with the Investigating Officer. The court emphasizes the necessity of compliance for bail eligibility.

Table of Content
1. petition filed under bnss for anticipatory bail. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments concerning the petitioner's implications and prosecution's case. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court’s observations on the minor quantity and lack of criminal history. (Para 6 , 7)
4. court orders petitioner to cooperate with the investigation. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioner/accused No.4 in Crime No.373 of 2025 on the file of Kollur Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8 (c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(A) and 27 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

2. The case of prosecution in brief is that on 22.07.2025, on receipt of credible information, Police apprehended accused Nos.1 to 3 and seized 90 grams of dry ganja and one orange-coloured Ecstasy pill. Basing on the same present crime was registered.

3. Heard Mr. Sujith Jaiswal, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed the alleged offence and he was falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submitted that even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the alleged contraband namely 90 grams of dry ganja and one orange-coloured Ecstasy pill were seized from the possession of the other accused and the entire allegations are levelled against accused No.1 only, hence, the provisions of the NDPS Act are not attracted against the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having any other criminal antecedents and he is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and ready to abide by the conditions which are going to be imposed by this Court and hence prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Investigating Officer has issued a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to accused Nos. 2 and 3, as well as to the petitioner/Accused No. 4 on 22.07.2025. However, the petitioner did not respond to the said notice. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material on record, it reveals that the alleged contraband seized is 90 grams of dry ganja, which is small quantity. Even according to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, petitioner is not having any other criminal antecedents.

7. Taking into consideration of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Criminal Petition, directing the petitioner/accused No.4 to appear before the Investigating Officer on or before 11.08.2025 and on such appearance, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and also the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra).

8. It is made clear that the petitioner/accused No.4 shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer for the investigation and make himself available to him as and when required and also provide the information/documents as sought by him to conclude the investigation.

9. If the petitioner/accused No.4 fails to cooperate with the Investigating Officer for investigation, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to take action against him in accordance with law.

10. Subject to the above directions, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top