Sinderi Harshit Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

Sinderi Harshit Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to the petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 in Cr.No.38 of 2024 of Annavaram Police Station, ASR District, subject to stringent conditions: (i) personal bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chinthapalli; (ii) appearance before the Station House Officer, Annavaram Police Station, ASR District, on every Saturday between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till the conclusion of the trial; (iii) no departure from the limits of the District without prior permission of the learned Trial Judge; (iv) no commission of or indulgence in similar offences in future; and (v) cooperation with the investigating officer in further investigation and availability as and when called.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4, arraigned in Cr.No.38/2024 of Annavaram P.S. (Alluri Sitharama Raju District) for offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) and Section 25 read with 8(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985, involving possession/transportation of 120.00 KGs of ganja (commercial quantity), should be enlarged on bail pending disposal of the crime.

Court's answer

While recognising that the petitioners were involved in the possession and transportation of 120.00 KGs of ganja, which is commercial in nature, the Court noted that they had languished in judicial custody for the past 203 days, that the charge sheet had not yet been filed, and that the two alleged similar offences were committed prior to the occurrence of the instant case.

Ratio / Principle

Keeping into consideration the number of days the petitioners had been in judicial custody, the nature of the allegations levelled against them, the stage of the investigation and their alleged role in the case, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail with certain stringent conditions, being of the opinion that such conditions for securing their presence before the learned Trial Court for trial would meet the interest of justice.

Key takeaways

In the result, the Criminal Petition was allowed: the petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 were to be enlarged on bail subject to (i) executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chinthapalli; (ii) appearing before the Station House Officer, Annavaram Police Station, ASR District, every Saturday between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till conclusion of trial; (iii) not leaving the limits of the District without prior permission of the learned Trial Judge; (iv) not committing or indulging in similar offences in future; and (v) cooperating with the investigating officer in further investigation and remaining available as and when called.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — NDPS Act — commercial quantity — Sections 437/439 CrPC and 480/483 BNSS — The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 in Cr.No.38 of 2024 of Annavaram Police Station, ASR District, were apprehended on 04.12.2024 at Lothugedda Bridge while transporting 120.00 KGs of ganja (commercial quantity) on two motorcycles, and were booked under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) and Section 25 read with 8(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985. Despite the commercial quantity and the alleged involvement of the petitioners in two similar earlier offences, the High Court (Dr. Y. Lakshmana Rao, J.) allowed Crl.P.No.4058 of 2025, noting that the petitioners had languished in judicial custody for 203 days, the charge sheet had not been filed, and the earlier similar offences predated the instant case. Bail was granted with stringent conditions: personal bond of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties for the like sum each before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chinthapalli; weekly reporting before the SHO, Annavaram Police Station, every Saturday between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm till conclusion of trial; no travel outside the district without prior permission of the Trial Judge; abstention from similar offences; and cooperation with the investigating officer. Order dated 10.07.2025.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

THURSDAYI THE TENTH DAY OF JULY, ap TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE #

:PRESENT:

T#H ONOURABLE DR JUSTICE YI LAKSHMANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 4058 OF 2025

Between I.

Sinderi Harshit, S/o. Chandrayya, aged about 26 years, R/o. Chinthaguppa village, KI-Ilamkota panchayat, G. Madugula Mandal, AIluri Sitharama Raju DI®StriCt.

Pangi Pethru, S/o. Bala Rao, aged about 21 years, R/o. Chinthaguppa Village, KiIIamkota Panchayat, G. Madugula Mandal, AIIuri Sitharama Raju District.

Pangi Chandra, s/o. Appa Rao, aged about 33 years, R/o. chinthaguppa village, KiIIamkota Panchayat, G. Madugula Mandal, AIIuri Sitharama Raju DI'StriCt.

Petitioners/Accused No.1, 3, 4

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court ofAndhra Pradesh.

Respondent

PetI'tiOn under Section petition under section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C/ 480 & 483 of BNSS., is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the criminaIPetition, the HI-gh Court may be pleased to enlarge the petitioners/Accused No.1, 3, 4 on bail pending disposal of crI-me No. 38/2024 ofAnnavaram p.s., now AIluri Sitharama Raju District.

The petl-lion coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petitI-On and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri. GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO Advocate for the petitioners and of PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent;

TL_ -_ ___J|

Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.4058 of 2O25 Dated 10.07.2025

The Court made the following:

ORDER-.

The Criminal Petition has been filed under sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity fthe cr.p,c.I)/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity £the BNSSj), seeking to enlarge the petitI'OnerS/Accused Nos.1,3 and 4 on bail in Cr.No.38 of 2024 of Annavaram Police Station,

ASR District, regI-Stered against the petI-{iOnerS/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 herein for the offences punI'Shable under Section 20(b)(ii)(C), Section 25 read with 8 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act,

1985 (for brevity {the NDPS ActJ).

The case of the prosecution is that on o4.12.2024, the Sub-

Inspector 6f police, Annavaram poll-Ce Station, on receipt of credl'ble information regarding the illegal posf`,essI'On and transportation of ganja, secured the presence of mediators, rushed to Lothugedda Bridge and

conducted vehicle checking. The Police noticed four persons on two motorcycles comI-ng from Kotagunnala sI'de, On Seeking the Police, they I tried to escape. T_he_Sub-Inspector of Police apprehended the Accused Nos.1 to 4, and found in their possession 120.00 KGs of Ganja, seized -```F

under a mediators' report and arrested them.

Dr. YLR, J crl.p.rdo.4058 of 2025 Dated 10.07.2025

Sri G.Maheswara Rao, the learned counsel for-the petitioners,

submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence; they are falsely implicated in this case; they are sole breadwinners of their family;

they are ready to abide any conditions to be imposed by this court; and urged to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

Per confra, Ms.P.Akila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, submits that the petitioners have found in possession of 120.00 KGs of Ganja, which is a commercial quantity; the petitioners were involved in another two similar crimes; and urged to dismiss the bail petition.

Perused the record.

As seen from the record, thert3 iS nO doubt thatthe Petitioners Were

involved in the possession and transportation of 120.00 KGs of Ganja,

which is commercial in nature. However, the petitioners have been languishing in judicial custody for the past 203 days. Charge sheet in this case is not yet filecl. Even though it is mentio`ned that the petitioners

were involved in. two offences of a similar nature, they were allegedly

committed prior occurrence of the instant case.

.I

4

Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.4058 of 2025 Dated 10.07.2025

Keeping into consideration the number of days the petitioners have

been in judicial custody, the nature of the allegations levelled against

them, stage of the investigation and their alleged role in the case, this

Court is inclined {o enlarge the petitioners on bail with certain stringent conditions.

This Court is of the opinion that if certain stringent conditions are

imposed on the petitioners for securing their presence before the learned Trial Court for trial, the interest of justice would be met.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following conditions:

i. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 shall be

enlarged on bail subject to'them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand

only) each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First class Magistrate,

Chinthapa][i.

ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 shall appear

before the Station House Officer, Annavaram Police Station, ASR District, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and

~--

05:00 pm, till the conclusion of t.he Trial.

.-..,-

5

Dr. YLR, J Crl.P.No.4O58 of 2025 Dated 10.07.2025

iii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 shall not leave

the limits of the District without prior permission from the

learned Trial Judge.

iv. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 shall not

commit or indulge in similar offences in future.

v. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1, 3 and 4 shall

cooperate with the investigating officer 'ln further

investigation of the case and shall be available to the .

investigating officer as and when called by him,

sD/-K. KAS[RAo All,HARE, ASS!STANT#^lSTRAR //TRUE COPY//

sECT[ON OFFICER

To,

The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chinthapalli, Alluri Sitharama Raju Distr'lct.

The I Additional District & Sessions Judge -Gum - Special Judge for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam.

The Superintendent, Central Jail, V-lsakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District.

The Slat-Ion House Officer, Annavaram Police Station, AIIuri Sitharama Raju D-lstrict.

One Cc to sri. GOLLAPALLI MAHESWARA RAO, Advocate [OPUC]

Two cos to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati. [OUT]

One spare 6'opy

|®®

HIGH COURT

DR.YLR, J

DATED:10/07/2025

BAIL ORDER

CRLP.No.4058 of 2025

ALLOWED