Bheemapalli Rambabu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Through Station House Officer,Bheemunipatnam Police Station,Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,High Court of Andhra Pradesh,Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶14

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

¶16

B.MURALI

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

¶18

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶19

2

¶20

The Court made the following:

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail in Crime No.92 of 2026 of Bhimunipatnam Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 herein for the alleged offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).

¶23

Mr.Bandi Murali, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. He is a law-abiding citizen. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing submissions, the learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the interest of justice.

¶24

Per contra , Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that, though the charge sheet has already been filed, the accusations against the petitioner are well founded. Hence, she prayed that the Criminal Petition be dismissed.

¶25

3

¶26

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

¶27

On perusal of the record, the allegation against the Petitioner/Accused No.1 is that he is in possession and transportation of 8.00 kgs of Ganja. It is not a commercial quantity. The Petitioner was arrested on 18.03.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 124 days. The petitioner is permanent resident of Vizianagaram District. He has got fixed abode. So far 4 witnesses have been examined, they are all official witnesses. Substantial portion of the investigation with regard to the alleged role played by the Petitioner in this case has been completed. If he is enlarged on bail with some stringent conditions, he may not evade the process of law. Since the charge sheet has already been filed against the petitioner, there is no likelihood of the petitioner threatening the witnesses, tampering with the evidence, or hampering the investigation. This Court, by order dated 17.06.2026 passed in Crl.P.No.4588 of 2026, enlarged Accused No.2 on bail subject to certain stringent conditions. The present petitioner/Accused No.1 stands on the same footing.

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused No.1, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused No.1 on bail with the following stringent conditions:

¶29

i. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only)

¶30

4

¶31

with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XV Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bheemunipatnam.

¶32

ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every adjournment without fail.

¶33

iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.

¶34

iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court.

¶35

v. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer.

¶36