Allowed

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

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Aug 2023CRLP/5360/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail petition under Section 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. regarding 21 kgs of ganja seized from two appellants under the NDPS Act, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh released the petitioners on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties, subject to appearances and non-interference conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal and surety bonds of Rs. 25,000 each, subject to attendance twice weekly and not tampering with witnesses.

Ettapuram Kandathil Irshad at Irshad E.K Vs the… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE rr{5:-;i;:;

¶2

:PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY , CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 536O OF 2023 v/

¶4

Between :

¶5

Ettapuram Kandathil lrshad @ lRSHAD E.K, S/o. Abdul Salam K @ Kuwaraviva Abdul Salam, aged about 33 years Palakode village, Ramanlhali, Kannur District, Kerala State. Aadhar Number.805718745815

¶6

Aboobakkar @ Shad, S/o. lsmail, aged about 31 years D.No.1-137/A, Padri Koppala House, Mani Bantwal Talauk, Dakshina Kanada Bantwal, Karnataka tale.Aadhar N umber.966533597293

¶7

...petitioner/Accused 2 & 3

¶8

AND

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati.

¶10

...RespondentlComplainant

¶11

petit'lon under section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in memorandum of grounds of criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to release the petit-loner/Accused -2 and 3 on bail in Cr.No.27/2023 of chinturu police Stat'lon, Alluri Seetha Rama Raju District (formally Known as East Godavari).

¶12

The petition coming on for hearing, upon Perusing the Petit®lon and memorandum of grounds of criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, Advocate for the Pet-ltioners and Public Prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following:

ORDER:

/-_`

THE HON9BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY

¶17

CRIMIHAL PETITIOH Ho. 536O OF 2O23

¶18

QBPEBi

¶19

This criminal petition, under sections 437 and 439 of cr.p.c., has been filed by the petitioners/A-2 and A-3, seeking regular ball in crime No.27 of 2O23 of chinturu 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, l985 (for short <the NDPS Actj).

¶21

Brief facts of the case are that on 23.O4.2O23 at about o4.3O p.m., on receipt of credible information, the sub-Inspector of police, chintum police station along with staff and mediators apprehended Accused Nos. 2 and 3 at chintum village and Manda1, who were found jn transporting 2l.ooKgs of Ganja in a swift Dzire car bearing No. KL6O B 8176. After conducting panchanama and after seizing the contraband, the police arested both the Accused, who were remanded to judicial custody thereafter.

¶22

t-e-- -_-

¶23

¶24

The leamed counsel for the petitioners contended that the 'petitioners were arrested on 23.O4.2023, who were remanded to judicial custody o.n 25.04.2O23. He further contended that the contraband seized from the possession of both the Accused is 21.OOKgs of Ganja, which is just more than Non-commercial quantity. As such, the leamed counsel for the petitioners requested this court to enlarge the petitioners/A-2 and A-3 on bail.

¶25

On the other hand, the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor, while opposing the bail application, on vlitten instructions, stated that the petitioners/A-2 and A-3 were not involved in any other similar crimes previously.

¶26

This Court perused the entire material on record.

¶27

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, as only 21.coKgs of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the petitioners and moreover as they are in judicial custody since 25.O4.2O23, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners/A-2 and A-3 on bail, on the following conditions.

¶28

FE-

¶29

;SJ

¶30

(i) The petitioners/A-2 and A-3 herein shall be released on bail on their executing personal bonds for ks.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand Only) each with two (o2) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate , Rampacho davaran .

¶31

(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 O1.00 p.m., until further orders.

¶32

(iii) Further, the petitioners are directed not to hamper the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesse s.

¶33

Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed.

¶34

------,----.-- --.--i-- ,.,`-_

¶35

Sd/-P.VINODKUMAR f ASSISTANT REGISTR

/ITRUE COPY//

Fc SECTION OFFICER

To'1. The I Additional Sess'lOnS Judge, East GodaVaTi at RajamahendraVaram.

¶40

The Judicial First Class Magistrate RampaChOdaVaram.JuC»Clal rll>L ulaO-.,.a.,_ _. - L.__I rl.I.^^r` DaiamahendraVaram3. The ±uuaplec+== t= i i t=t±,fa fir-a**nl+a %r+: DRn%¢narem%\ae*oanr,a ±=satm€

¶41

The station House Officer, Ch'Inturu Police Station, East Godavari D'lstriCt.

¶42

One cc to sri. Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, Advocate IOPUCI

¶43

Two cos to public prosecutor, High Court Of AP [OUT]

¶44

One sPareCOPy

9pr \ \

HIGH COURT

KS RJ

DATE D : 1 7/O8/2023

ORDER

CRLP.No.5360 of 2023

ALLOWED

-3r:'=.j'., -
I.\ a'--- ®ri¥ _3 i -_T-i,± <+
f

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ettapuram Kandathil Irshad at Irshad E.K 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

Ashapak Ashraf Khan Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Binny.Niranjan Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Manchala Kiran Raju Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Yenneti Durga Prasad at Durga Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Pallacholla Chaitanya Ram Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh