THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.9182 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 in Crime No.300 of 2025 of Shamirpet Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 8(C),r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 27(A) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 06.04.2025, on receipt of credible information, the police apprehended the petitioners along with other accused and seized 273.165 kgs of ganja. Basing on the same, present crime was registered.

3. Heard Mr.Ravuri Sai Sumanth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed the offence. He further submitted that the entire allegations are levelled against the accused Nos.2 and 5 only and the petitioners have been implicated in the present case solely on the basis of their confession statements recorded while they are in police custody and the same is not admissible under law in view of Section 67 of the NDPS Act. He further submitted that there are no specific allegations against petitioner Nos.2 and 3/accused Nos.3 and 4, and they had no role in the commission of the alleged offences. Even according to the prosecution, accused No.5 is supplier, and there is no direct involvement of petitioner No.1/accused No.1 in the present crime. The only allegation levelled against petitioner No.1/accused No.1 is that he allegedly travelled along with accused No.2 to Odisha to procure the seized contraband from accused No.5. However, the prosecution has not placed any iota of material on record to show that accused No.1 was present in the State of Odisha for the purpose of purchasing the contraband. He further submitted that there is no direct involvement of the petitioners recorded either in the complaint, the remand case diary, or the panchanama.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that even according to the prosecution, the goods were allegedly loaded in Hyderabad. However, without specifying any exact date, the prosecution claims that the goods were subsequently taken to Odisha, where the contraband was loaded on 04.04.2025. In such circumstances, once the contraband was allegedly loaded in Odisha, the natural route to the intended destination Gurgaon would be a northerly direction. Therefore, there was no reason for the vehicle to travel back southwards to Hyderabad. He further submitted that the petitioners/accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 were arrested on 06.04.2025 and since more than 115 days they were languishing in jail and the major part of the investigation is completed, except filing of the charge sheet and crucial witnesses were examined. Hence, the question of interfering with the investigation or influencing the witnesses or tampering the witnesses by the petitioners does not arise. He further submitted that the petitioners are not having any criminal antecedents and prior to this present crime, they never involved in similar offences. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation, if any, and also abide by the conditions which are going to be imposed by this Court. Hence, prayed for grant of bail.

6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners have committed grave offence under the provisions of the NDPS Act and the Police seized the contraband namely 273.165 kgs dry ganja which is a commercial quantity. He further submitted that accused Nos.2 and 3 were absconding and the investigation is under progress. As per the provisions of Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the petitioners are not entitled for grant of