Allowed

G. Suresh v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC21 Aug 2023CRLP/5797/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted statutory bail to two accused persons charged under the NDPS Act for a non-commercial quantity, as the charge sheet was not filed within the statutory period of 60 days. Bail was granted on personal bond and surety conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties for a like sum, and complying with reporting and investigation conditions.

G. Suresh Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

[3239]

¶2

I-I_''. Jt +,. \ `

¶3

lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVA=£ii.,ifg±F:=+i.3i:=¥¥`:6

¶4

MONDAY ,THE "ENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST !lf;a-%:£g:~:1=¥:§: |TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

I. pRESENT|.

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY, CRIMINAL PETITION MOS: 5776 & 5797 OF 2023/'

¶7

_a-:.2... '[t'-

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO-. '5776 OF -2Q2!

¶9

Between:

¶10

N.Kiran Kumar, S/o Nirmal Kumar, aged 35 years, R/o D.No.177, 7th Cross, Kadirappa Road,. Cox Town, Bangalor6, `:Karnataka' pet-ltioner,Accused 2

¶11

AND + ,l.i:-.I.,l ';:wJL.-`: ,. I

¶12

state of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi' ''! l'f' i Respondent/Complainant

¶13

*+ /.-<.-:i * I t6;a.3``..! ¢;-I

¶14

petition under sect'lon 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, pray-lng that in the Circumstances stated in the memorandum :bfrgrblibdrs-rfi,led in suppoh of the crim'lnal petition, the High Court may be Pleased tO COnSider the Same and release the Petitioner/A-2 on ba" in cr.Not.1 O,5/2lOa9.i_@f l!^irFg'wi~ra_;,.`P.O'ice Station, Visakhapatnam Di.strict On Such terms and conditions as the Honourable Court deems fit and Proper under the I'lght of the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. ,

¶15

"...->~.`` i\l'f':, ..I

¶16

.I.```i,; `` J~=I I,I.-'td^`}i''l1^_,

¶17

couNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER l'. SRI GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO

¶18

couNSEL FOR THE RESPOND+ENFIJ; PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

. ,T 'JI Y`^' I_

¶20

. .. ,`J:,j I

¶21

~ 1, ,; I,'``i;{l'~J± ?|`tlltlt:

¶22

I |i'1 lh,J~i8t'u``t'e-I -}

¶23

. I r Jt.f t1'l +:i.l``+i,I 'i 'J I,.`,:

¶24

;I-I-.,'L,:\ ,, .(

¶25

!5r\ irt.--I i;llT.€t'! ,I;i

¶26

-i..'t.-,.',I *I I . }, - \

¶27

-I .i, >l._---. I

¶28

£B!E4LNAL PETITION NO: 5797 QF 2023

¶29

i .`

¶30

Between.- .'<L,'. -3' '`;+{|@^.

¶31

G. Suresh, s/o Ganesh, aged. 32 yrs,t R/o D.No. KNo-3, 2nd FIoor, Makkan Road cross, shivajnagar, Bangalore North, G.P.O, Karnataka, Bangalore

¶32

AND

¶33

/ i .: F: l L,)-..I PetitI-Oner/Accused 1

¶34

state ofAndhra pradesh, represented by its public prosecutor, High Court of Andhra pradesh at Amaravathi.i. ,-I

¶35

Respondent/complainant

¶36

petition under sectioo,r4-37_,&±:43S,,ar Cr.P.C, praying that Ion the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in support of the crl'minal petitl-on, the High Court may be pleased to consider the same and release the petitioner/A-1 on bal'I in Cr.No.105/2023 of ll T.own ,Poliee station, visakhapatnam District on such term: and conditI'OnS aS the Honourable-,court deems fit and proper under the light of the clrCumStanCeS Of the I,case,I in' thethterest-of justl'ce.

¶37

couNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER .I SKI GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO-

¶38

couNSEL FOR THE R.ESPONPENTS :wPuBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶39

I-I. ,'r'., .I.I,'+,.:I.!l,ii,?,;'

¶40

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER

¶41

i:., ,, , . +j9,: }'1j;;.['.: , };

¶42

I , (II, i: ? l~.Jl+Tl , luiy,/I:-:I- l..: : l} | - .... 5,,:_ :;T31.,I :. :;i.. } |I=i r, I.i, |` I,'+I ``,-

¶43

I:+``1, .:i`: h|t't,I to-

¶44

-: ,: .S!:;:L`.,,li,,i.:!l--!,r\ . . I : ,L!,,f=

¶45

S:'3l .i;,i--,I..'Jii=,i.:i :* .,:

¶46

/ r ) \ r . ` '|

¶47

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY

¶48

!B±_-PqNOSl5776 & 5797 OF 2Q23

¶49

£9MMON ORDE_R:-

¶50

since both the criminal petitions, under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C., have been filed by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.105 of 2023 of II Town Police Station, VisakhaPatnam District, they are being disposed of by this common order.

¶51

Crl.P.No.5776 of 2023 is-filed by the Accused No.2;

¶52

whereas crl.p.No.5797 of 2023 is filed by Accused No.1.

¶53

3, A case has been registered against the Petitioners herein and others for the offences pun'lshable 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').

¶54

Heard. Perused the record.

¶55

On a perusal Of the material available On record, it goes to show that on 19-05-2023 at.about 18.00 hours, On receipt of the cred-lble information, the sub-Inspector Of Police, II

¶56

¶57

¶58

Town poll-ce station along with staff and mediators apprehended Accused Mos.1 and 2, who were found in possession of 20,00 kgs of GanJ'a. On the confession made by Accused Nos.1 and 2, the polI|Ce apprehended Accused Mos.5 and 6, who were remanded to judI-Cl®al Custody. So far as Accused Mos.3 and 4 are concerned, they are still at large.

¶59

The learned counsel for the petl-tioners contended that the contraband seized from the possession of the accused I'S 20.00 kgs, whI'Ch iS nOn-COmmerc,-al quantity. He further contended that the petI-tl-OnerS are jn judl-cjal custody sl'nce - 19-05-2023. Though the statutory period of60 days has been completed, the police have not fI'Ied charge sheet. He, therefore, contended that both the petitioners are entI-tled for a statutory bail.

¶60

per confra, the learned special Assistant public prosecutor, on instructions, confirms the factum of non-fill'ng of charge sheet even after completI~On Of Statutory period of 60 days.

¶61

¶62

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances Of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2, on the following conditions.

¶63

(i) The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 herein shall be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with two(2) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional ,Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam,

¶64

(ii) On release, the petitioners shall appear before the Stat'lon House Officer concerned twice in a week i.e., on every Monday and Friday between 10.00 a.m. and 01,00 p.m., until further orders.

¶65

(iii) Further, the petition`ers are directed not to hamper

¶66

the investigation and tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶67

Accordingly, both the Criminal Petitions are allowed.

¶68

I.-_ _+

¶69

Sd/- sK. MD. RAFI AS S IS TANj=A~R

¶70

//TRUE 'COPY//

¶71

For I SECTION OFFICER

¶72

To'1. The lI Additional Chi;; wletropoTiiJ;£n Magistrate, Visakhapatnam

¶73

¶74

The Superintendent, :Q,?,prfeh,Prifsppj:Visakhapatnam

¶75

The Station House offi.QerJ,`.[l Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam District

¶76

One CC to Sri GollaRa!lj. M?.he,§wara Bao Advocate [OPUC]

¶77

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, thigh court ofAP [OUT]

¶78

One spare copy

H'GH couRT

J{SRJ

DATED..21/o8/2023

BAIL ORDER

CRJM/NAL PET/T'oN Mos.- 5776 a 5797 oF 2023

¶85

ALLOWED

¶86

I<l* ,r(_I. .-.-i';-a} €±' .I

¶87

8 _.fly<br>L<br>|+~ ~
Jb

G. Suresh v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Suresh v. 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

Thammiraju Sairam Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Datta Nadh Prasad Pawar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Palakeerthi Ramanaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh