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) 46104

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
Suhas Rau Dhayagude @ Dhada Patti – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 9706/2025



The Hon’ble Smt Justice K.Sujana Criminal Petition No.9706 of 2025

Order

:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘the BNSS’) seeking bail to the petitioner/accused No.8 in Crime No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Chiragpally Police Station, Sangareddy District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.09.2024 at about 17:00 hours, Police intercepted a Mahindra Bolero Max pickup vehicle in the limits of Chiragpally Village, in front of Anand Dhaba for allegedly transporting 140Kgs of Ganja from Malkangiri to Hyderabad. The petitioner has been taken into custody vide P.T warrant on 13.12.2024 for the offence took place on 09.09.2024, based on the confession statement of the accused in the said crime.

3. Heard Mr.Ravuri Sai Sumanth, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.8 and Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-

State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no recovery of contraband from the possession of the petitioner, as such in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu1, he is entitled for bail and Section 37 of NDPS Act, not a bar in present circumstances as prima facie role of petitioner is still under question without subjective concrete evidence of personal involvement as no possession has been recovered from the petitioner. He further submitted that accused No.5 were already granted bail in the same crime. Hence, he prayed the Court to grant bail by allowing the criminal petition.

(2020) 9 SCC 1

5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and three cases are pending against the petitioner with the similar offences vide Crime Nos.323, 50 and 400 of 2024 and the contraband involved in this case is in huge quantity i.e., 140Kgs of dry Ganja from accused Nos.1 and 2. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. Considering the submissions made by the both the parties and material available on record, the contraband involved in this case i.e., 140Kgs of dry Ganja, which is commercial quantity. It is stated that in the same crime accused No.5 have already granted bail by this Court in Crl.P.No.7126 of 2025, whereas, the said petition is allowed on the ground that no charge sheet is filed. However, a perusal of the record discloses that charge sheet is already filed. Moreover, the petitioner is involved in other cases viz., Crime Nos.323, 50 and 400 of 2024 with similar offence. Hence, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

___________________

K.Sujana, J Date: 18.08.2025

pss

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