The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, accused No. 3, in a NDPS case involving 221kg of amphetamine. The court accepted the defense doubt regarding IME numbers and location, allowing bail subject to a personal bond.
Petitioner enlarged on bail by executing personal bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN : PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T. RAJANI
CRLP.No. 1828 of 2018
Between:-
lvl. Ravi Shankar Rao, S/o. I,4. Satyanarayana.
..... Petitioner/Accused No.3.
AND
The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, Through lntelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Sub-Zone, Hyderabad.
..... RespondenUComplainant
Petitlon filed under Sections 437 & 439 Cr.P.C. praying that in the
circumstances staled in the Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be
pleased to release the Petitoner/Accused No.3 herein on bail in S.CNo. 96 of 2017
for the offence under Sec. 22 (C), 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985
Thepetition coming on for hearing, uponperusing thememorandum of grounds
filed in suppo( thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V.Raghunath, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Sri V. Gopala Krishna Gokhale, SpecialPublic
Prosecutor on behalf of Respondent-State, the Courtmade the followingORDER :-
I i
SMT JUSTICET. RA]ANI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.1828 OF 2018
letition is filed, under Sections 437and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking toenlarge the petitioner, who is accused No.3, on bail in S.C.No.96 ot 2017 on the file of the Court of Metropolitan SessionsJudge, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar (for short, 'the Court below').
ii
2
Public Prosecutor, that there is a possibility of IME number being duplicated and that unless the IME number is sent to FSL, the truth or otherwise cannot come out, cannot be considered. Learned Public Prosecutor submlts that unless theparticular aspect is examined during trial, it cannot be said that the tower will not be able to catch both locations namely Miyapur and Bachupally. But thatground can be raised by theprosecution to seek for conviction, but not for opposing the bail, when, even after the investigation and filing of charge sheet, theprosecution leaves a doubt. The benefit of the said doubt has to begiven to the petitioner.
Sd/- N.PURUSHOTHAMREDDY ASSIS REGISTRAR
,TRUE COPY//
for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To
'1.The Niletropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District At L.B. Nagar.
2.The lX l\4etropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District at t,4iyapur.
3.The lntelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bueau, Sub-Zone, Hyderabad
4The Superintendent, Central Prison, Cherlapally, Ranga Reddy District.
5.Two CCs to Sri V.Gopala Krishna Gokhale, Special Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyd.(OUT)
6.One CC to Sri V. Raghunath, Advocates(OPuc)
7.One spare copy.
TKK
tIIG[lcoull'l'
'l'R.J
l)T.15-03-20It'|.
BAIL0RI)IiR
q
t
,.
ffi
#
' ,j
'tBtd
'*.t
CRL.I'.No.I tt28 of 2018
IIEI-I.,,\SL'TITE PE'TI'IIO\ EII oNB.\11..
\
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused under the NDPS Act is entitled to bail.
Whether doubts regarding the IME number and location raise issues prejudicial to the accused opposing bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
lvl. Ravi Shankar Rao
The State of Telangana
T. RAJANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
