Dismissed

Thammiraju Sairam v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Aug 2023CRLP/5192/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition for bail under Sections 437 and 439 of CrPC was filed by two accused charged under the NDPS Act. The court dismissed the petition because 60 kgs of Ganja were seized, constituting a commercial quantity under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, making the accused ineligible for bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; accused remain in judicial custody.

Thammiraju Sairam Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

¶2

CRL.P.NO.5192 OF 2023

¶3

ORDER :-

¶4

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.107 of 2023 of S.Kota Police Station, Vizianagaram District.

¶5

A case has been registered against the petitioners herein and others for the offences punishable under Sections. Section.20(b)(ii)(c) read with Section 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’).

¶6

Heard. Perused the record.

¶7

The brief facts of the case of the prosecution succinctly is thus:-

¶8

On 07-05-2023 at about 3.00 P.M the Sub-Inspector of Police, S.Kota Police Station along with his staff and mediators apprehended Accused Nos.1 and 2 at Bolderara Check Post, Bolderara village while they were loading 60 kgs of Ganja into a Car. After conducting panchanama and after seizing the contraband, the Sub-Inspector of Police arrested Accused

¶9

¶10

Nos.1 and 2 who were remanded to the judicial custody thereafter. On seeing the police, Accused No.3, who was also present, escaped from the scene of offence.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners were arrested on 07-05-2023 and every since they are in judicial custody. He, therefore, requests this court to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶12

Per contra , the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor, opposed the bail application contending inter alia that the contraband seized from the possession of the accused is 60 kgs, which is a commercial quantity. He further contended that Accused No.2 was involved in similar crimes previously.

¶13

This court perused the entire material on record. As the contraband seized from the possession of both the accused is 60 kgs and in view of the provision under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶14

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶15

_______________ K.SURESH REDDY,J

¶16

21-08-2023. TSNR

Thammiraju Sairam v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thammiraju Sairam 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

Thimmapuram Dudekula Sardar Vali Vs the State of Andhra Pardesh

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

Datta Nadh Prasad Pawar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

G. Suresh Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Palakeerthi Ramanaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh