Allowed

Uthama Rama Chowdary v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Aug 2023CRLP/4898/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail petition filed by three accused persons charged under the NDPS Act for possession of narcotic substances. The court imposed bail conditions including personal bonds, sureties, and periodic reporting.

What did the court decide?

Accused Uthama Rama Chowdary, Gowrav Ram and Lalith Patel were enlarged on regular bail on Rs. 25,000 personal bonds each with two sureties of like sum, directed to appear weekly and not hamper invest

Uthama Rama Chowdary Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

E= i=

`. I

....-

_I 323

lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AfV[ARAVATr ` FRIDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST~ f ll^/O THOUSAND AND ll^/ENTY THREE ~ t¢--

¶7

:PRESENT:

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDD+:ytJr CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4898 OF 2023 / `c

¶9

Between: + I J,t:tJ-

¶10

Uthama Rama ChowdaryI S/o Prabhuram, Aged 32 years,D.NO.39-

¶11

103/4,Bank Ramanas House, Venkunaidupeta, Narsipatnam, Visakhapatnam.

¶12

Gowrav Ram, S/o `Jamthaji,Aged 42 years, Jilebhi sweet stall,bus top center, Kotanand uruvillage, Kakinada D1'StriCt.

¶13

Lalith Patel, S/o Chinaajee,Aged 29 years, Jilebhi sweet stall,bus top center, Kotananduruvillage,Kakinada District.

¶14

Petitioners/Accused-A1, A4 & A5

¶15

AND

¶16

The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By its Public Prosecutor, High Court of at Amaravathi Through Station House Officer, Bommuru Police Station, East Godavari District.

¶17

Respondent Petition under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners on Regular Bail to the petl'tioners/ accused in Crime No. 66 of 2023 of, BommuruPolice Station, Rajamhend'ravaram, East Godavari District dated 09-O3-2023 .

¶18

The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the memorandum of grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. MEKALA ANUSHA Advocate for the Petitioners and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following ORDER

¶19

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C., has been flled by the petitioners/A-1, A-4 and A-5, seeking regular bail in Crime No.66 of 2O23 of Bommum police Station, East Godavari District.

¶20

The above Crime was registered against the petitioners herein and others for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c) read with Section 2O(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and psychotropic substances Act, 1985 (for short tthe NJDPS ActJ).

¶21

Brief facts of the case are that On 09.O3.2O23 at about o9.45 a.m., on receipt Of Credible information, the sub-Inspector of Police, Bommum Police Station along with staff and mediators apprehended Accused Nos. 1 to 5 at NH-16 Road, Diwancheruvu Village, Rajanagaram Mandal, who were found in transporting 25.72OKgs of Ganja in Mahendra XUV Car bearing No. UP14 CE 5151. After conducting panchanama add after seizing the contraband, the police arrested all the five Accused, who were remanded to

¶22

judicial custody thereafter.

---. .-€yst'

_/, /

The leamed counsel for the petitioners contended that the contraband seized from the possession of all the five Accused is 25.72OKgs of Ganja and further they are in judicial custody since o9.O3.2O23. As such, the learned counsel for the petitioners requested this court to enlarge the petitioners/A-1, A-4 and A-5 on bail.

¶27

On the other hand, the learned special Assistant Public Prosecutor, while opposing the bail application, on written instructions, stated that the petitioners/A-1, A-4 and A-5 were not involved in any other similar crimes p reviously.

¶28

This Court perused the entire material on record.

¶29

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and as the contraband seized from the Possession Of all the five Accused is 25.72OKgs of Ganja and moreover they are in judicial custody since o9.O3.2O23, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners/A-1, A-4 and

¶30

A-5 on ball, on the following conditions.

¶31

(i) The petitioners/A-1, A-4 and A-5 herein shall be released on bail on their executing personal bonds for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) each

¶32

with two (o2) sureties for a like Sum each tO the satisfaction of the learned VI Additional Judicial

¶33

Magistrate Of First Class, RajamahendraVaram.

¶34

(ii) on release, the petitioners shall appear before the station House Officer COnCerned, twice in a Week i.e., on every Monday and Thursday betWeen10.OO a.m. and o 1.00 p.m., until further Orders.

¶35

(iii) Further, the Petitioners are directed not tO hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶36

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition iS allowed.

¶37

sd/- K. KAS!RAO AtCH.&Rl:T:== `,+i =t±_ \Q:€ RAt* ie±G tSul€ RA* i-Ss \ sT^N+-

¶38

//TRUE COPY//

¶39

SECTION^{off-iCEIR `~} FO

¶40

-CuCr) The I Additional Sessions Judge, East Godavari at Rajamahendravaram. The superintendent, cenral Ja-ll, RajamahendraVaram. The station House Offlcer, Bommuru Police Station, East Godavari District.

¶41

One CC to SRl. MEKALA ANUSHA Advocate [OPUC]

¶42

Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofA.P[OUT]

¶43

One spare copy.

¶44

¶45

HIGH COURT

¶46

LE=ce`
_r,
. I,,./'
J|..I
-,,,,rf,,rf

I,,f
~,,.,

KS RJ

DATED..18/O8/2023

BAIL ORDER

CRLP.No.4898 of 2023

ALLOWED

*'7;
izre
_'``
vS*\ " Ll\l\\\\\_H,`L bEL®TB :
-^T b' ?I _+-
Jf ?r'f| •l.

Uthama Rama Chowdary v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uthama Rama Chowdary v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yenneti Durga Prasad at Durga Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Ettapuram Kandathil Irshad at Irshad E.K Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Bhukke Govind Naik at Jumma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Hanuman Agro Industries Vs Gopal Krishna Dwivedi, I.A.S.

Onuoha Chukuwemka at Emmy N.Guessan at Koffin Harve Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Thuvvapalli Mahaboob Basha Vs Pathan Mahaboob Chand