IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.17715 OF 2025 DATE : 07.01.2026 Between :

Biren Naik & another … Petitioners/A.1 & A.2 And The State of Telangana, Rep., Through its Public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana … Respondents/Complainant : ORDER :

This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioners/A.1 and A.2 seeking their enlargement on bail in connection with Crime No.116 of 2025 of Prohibition & Excise Police Station, Hayathnagar. The offences alleged against the petitioners 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 facts of the case are that on 09.09.2025 at about 8.20 A.M, the Prohibition and Excise Police, RR Zone conducted a route watch and at RFC Main gate, Abdullapurmet, Ranga Reddy District, they found two persons in illegal possession and transportation of Dry ganja weighing about 21.33 kgs and seized the same. As such, a case was registered against the accused for the said offences.

3. Heard Sri Seshagiri Rao Yelamanchili, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is no evidence to prove that the contraband seized from the suitcase belongs to the petitioners as the same was seized from a public place which is accessible to all. The police have not followed the procedure prescribed under Sections 42(2), 50 and 53 of the NDPS Act. The contraband was not seized in the presence of independent witnesses as required by law. Further most of the investigation is completed except filing of charge sheet. As such, petitioners’ custodial interrogation is not required at this stage. Petitioners are in jail from 09.09.2025 and they are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and prayed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail on the ground that the quantity involved in this case is a commercial quantity. The petitioners are residents of Odisha State and in view of rigor of Section 37 of NDPS Act, petitioners are not entitled for bail and requested this Court to dismiss this petition.

6. Having regard to the submissions made and the material placed on record, it appears that the police seized 21.33 kgs of Ganja which is a huge commercial quantity. That being so, it is relevant to extract 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, it is clear that Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates that offences involving commercial quantities be non- bailable, requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. 8. Given the serious set of allegations leveled against the petitioners w