Anticipatory bail in NDPS cases should be denied if a prima facie link exists between the accused and the offence, even if based on co-accused statements, to ensure that the investigation is not hampered.

: ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking the Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.72 of 2026 of Borabanda Police Station, Hyderabad District. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 8(C) r/w.20 (b)(ii)(B), 27 and 29 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 03.02.2026, the complainant received credible information that a person was present at Vikaspuri Colony Park, AG Colony, Borabanda, Hyderabad, in possession of Ganja and was attempting to sell or consume the same. Believing the information to be true, the complainant reduced the same into writing and informed his superior officer under Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, 1985, secured mediators, and proceeded to the spot along with police staff and clues team. Upon reaching the location, the suspect attempted to flee but was apprehended. On enquiry, he disclosed his name as Mohd. Ansari. During inquiry he allegedly confessed that he was carrying Ganja for sale to customers and had been purchasing the same for the last several months from one Mohammed of Sultan Nagar, Borabanda. Thereafter, in the presence of mediators, the accused produced a black plastic cover containing dry loose Ganja with flowering and fruiting tops. On weighing the contraband was found to be 1200 grams, which was seized in accordance with procedure, leading to registration of the present case.

3. Heard Sri Md. Saleem Ahmed Khan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent – State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. The prosecution allegation is that on 03.02.2026 the police apprehended A.1 near Vikaspuri Colony Park, Borabanda, and seized 1200 grams of Ganja from his possession, and that the said contraband was allegedly supplied by the petitioner. Learned counsel contended that the implication of petitioner is solely based on the alleged confession statement of A.1, which is inadmissible in evidence. It is further submitted that no contraband was recovered from the petitioner and there is absolutely no direct or independent material connecting him with the alleged offence. The allegations are stated to be vague and no specific overt act has been attributed to the petitioner. It is also contended that the alleged quantity of 1200 grams is only intermediate quantity and therefore the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 are not attracted. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen, permanent resident of Hyderabad, there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence, and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation as and when required. Hence, prayed this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail contending that the petitioner herein is also actively involved in this offence. He further contended that even though the contraband is less than commercial quantity, the petitioner is involved in this business. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it is noted that the li