IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
Thunam Aravind alias Advik – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 13818/2025
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13818 OF 2025
ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner/A.2 seeking his enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.155 of 2025 of IS Sadan Police Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Section 8(C) r/w.20 (b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’)
2. The case of the prosecution is that on credible information that one person carrying Ganja in White colour Hundai Verna Car bearing No.AP 21 AN 6489, the police went to the subject place and intercepted the said car coming from Sagar Ring road and found one person driving the car. On enquiry, initially he gave evasive replies but on further questioning he revealed that he is carrying Ganja in the dickey of car which was brought from Odisha to deliver at Dhoolpet and the said Ganja was seized from his possession totaling to 45.34 kgs. Hence, complaint was lodged against the accused for the said offences.
3. Heard Sri Pasham Trivikram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.
4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is innocent of the alleged offences and he is falsely implicated in this case basing on the confession of A.1 who was found in possession of Ganja. The petitioner is in jail from 11.07.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation and undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed this Court to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail on the ground that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity and that petitioner is also involved in another crime and in view of rigor of Section 37 of NDPS Act, petitioner is not entitled for bail and requested this Court to dismiss this petition.
6. Considering the submissions made by the respective counsel and the material placed on record, it is seen that 45.34 kgs of ganja was seized in this case which is a commercial quantity. The petitioner herein is also involved in other crimes for the same offences. Though petitioner is in jail from
11.07.2025, it is not a ground to grant bail to the petitioner. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and the same reads as under :
“37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable. -- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),-- (a) every offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable;
(b) no person accused of an offence punishable for 1[offences under section 19 or section 24 or section 27A and also for offences involving commercial quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless--
(i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an opportunity to oppose the application for such release, and (ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the application, the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.
(2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in force on granting of bail.”
7. In view thereof, Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates that offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. In the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, this Court is not satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are met. Therefore, the Criminal Petition lacks merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
8. Accordin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.