THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11644 of 2025

ORAL ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2 in Crime No.171 of 2025 of Yellandu Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that, based on credible information, on 05.05.2025, the police conducted a raid and intercepted an auto, from which they seized 111.754 kilograms of dry ganja found in the possession of Accused No.1, under the cover of a panchanama. Accused No.2 was identified as the driver of the pilot vehicle. Consequently, Accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested, and a case was registered against them for offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act

3. Heard Ms. Swathi Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Arun Kumar Doddle, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent - State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was innocent and that there were no specific allegations against him and that the allegation against the petitioner was that he had been escorting the auto-rickshaw; however, he was in no way connected with the said contraband. He further submitted that the petitioner had been in jail since 05.05.2025, for more than four months, and no charge sheet had been filed till date and that the police had conducted the search and recorded the panchanama without adhering to the mandatory procedures prescribed under the provisions of the NDPS Act and that the petitioner is willing to cooperate with the investigation and also ready to abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, stating that the alleged contraband involved in this case i.e., 111.754 kilograms of dry ganja, which constitutes a commercial quantity. He further submitted that the investigation is in progress and if the petitioner is released on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses.

Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. Having regard to the rival submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material placed on record, it was noted that learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner had been in judicial custody since 05.05.2025. Although it was submitted that the petitioner was in no way connected with the said allegations, the remand case diary indicated that Accused Nos.1 and 2 had jointly hatched a plan to transport the ganja for the purpose of engaging in ganja trade. At this stage, it is pertinent to refer to Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which 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 mand