| |
CDJ 2026 APHC 1488
|
| Court : High Court of Andhra Pradesh |
| Case No : Criminal Petition No. 6672 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO |
| Parties : Sri Karnati Vijay Alias Vijay Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Public ProsecutorHigh Court of A.P., Amaravathi |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: Mohammed Rehana, Advocate. For the Respondent: Public Prosecutor. |
| Date of Judgment : 11-08-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 480 & 483 -
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- Sections 20(b)(ii)(A), 20(b)(ii)(B) read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
2. Catch Words:
bail, judicial custody, investigation, witnesses, sureties, bond, district limits, inducement, threat, commission of offence
3. Summary:
The Criminal Petition under the BNSS sought bail for Accused No.9, charged under the NDPS Act for possession of 6.100 kg of ganja. The petitioner argued innocence, sole family earner status, and willingness to comply with conditions. The prosecution opposed bail citing ongoing investigation and risk of absconding. The court noted the petitioner’s lack of prior adverse antecedents, completion of material investigation, and the non‑commercial nature of the seized contraband. Considering these factors, the court deemed the risk of tampering or witness intimidation minimal. Consequently, the court decided to grant bail with stringent conditions, including a bond, sureties, regular reporting to the SHO, restriction on district travel, and cooperation with investigators. The bail order was directed to be executed by the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.9 on bail in Crime No.57 of 2026 of Vizianagaram Police Station, Vizianagaram District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.9 herein for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(A), 20(b)(ii)(B) read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).
2. Ms.Mohammed Rehana, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. He is a law-abiding citizen. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, the learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.
3. Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohit, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.
5. As seen from the record, the petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.9. He was arrested on 19.06.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 53 days. Originally, the FIR was filed against Accused Nos.1 to 7. Ten days after the registration of the FIR, the petitioner/Accused No.9 was arrested, and 6.100 Kgs. of ganja was allegedly seized from the possession of the petitioner. The seized contraband is not a commercial quantity. So far, ten witnesses have been examined. All of them are official witnesses. There are no similar adverse antecedents reported against the petitioner. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Karnataka State. He has got fixed abode. The material portion of the investigation with regard to the alleged role played by the petitioner has been completed. Therefore, the possibility of the petitioner threatening the witnesses, tampering with the evidence, or hampering the investigation may not arise. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail with some stringent conditions, he would abide by those conditions and cooperate with the trial for disposal of the case.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused No.9, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.9 on bail with some stringent conditions.
7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following stringent conditions:
i. The Petitioner/Accused No.9 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vizianagaram.
ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.9 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet.
iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.9 shall not leave the limits of the District without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.
iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.9 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.
v. The Petitioner/Accused No.9 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required.
vi. The Petitioner/Accused No.9 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court.
|
| |
