Allowed

Chinna Rathod Vinod Kumar v. the State of Ts

Telangana HC17 Sept 2020CRLP/3306/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Telangana granted regular bail to accused drivers and security guard charged with commercial dealing in narcotic drugs. Court imposed monetary bonds and reporting conditions on release.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail on execution of personal bonds of Rs. 15,000 each with two sureties for like sum, reporting to SHO every Sunday, and abiding by Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

Chinna Rathod Vinod Kumar Vs the State of Ts — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

I³¹⁶⁸ |

¶2

IN TTIE I{I(]H COUR'I'FOIT THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDtrRABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶4

:PRESENT:

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K,LAKSHMAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3306 OF 2020

¶7

Betrveen:

¶8

Chinna Rathod Vinod Kumar, S/o. Chinna Rathod Baswaraj,

¶9

Jadhav Aravind, S/o. Maruthi,

¶10

Petitioners/Accused Nos. I &2

¶11

ANI)

¶12

'l'he State ofTelangana State, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court ofTelangana State, Hyderabad, through the SHO, Jharasangam Police Station, Sangareddy District

¶13

RespondenVComplainant

¶14

Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the petition and the grounds filed therein, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos.l and 2 on bail in connection with F.l.R. No.40 of 2020, dated 17 .06.2020 on the file of the SHO Jharasangam Police Station, Sangareddy District;

¶15

1'he petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the grounds filed therein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri K.Laxmaiah, Advocate for the Petitioners, and of the Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent the Court made the following.

¶16

¶17

THT} HON'BLE JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶18

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3306 of 2O2O

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking regular bail. The petitioners are A-1 and A-2 in FIR No.40 of 2020 of SHO, Jharasangam Police Station, Sangareddy District.^The offence alleged against the petitioners is punishabie^r-tnder Section 20(b)( ii(c) of NDPS Act, 1985.

¶21

Heard Sri Laxmaiah Kanchani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/A- 1 and A-2 and the learned Public Prose(Lltor appearing for the respondent Stat,3 Perused the rt:cord

¶22

Sri La-:<maiah Kanchani, learned counsel for th e petitioners/A- i and A-2 would submit that petitioner No.1/A-1 is a Auto Driver and petitioner No.2lA-2 is working as a Security^tluard and they are eking out their livelihood by doing the saicl jobs. He also submits that the petitioners are in jail from li .06.2020 onwarcis and due to their arrest their families are sr-rffering a lot. Learned counsel for the petitioners would also cc,ntend that there are no other cases pending against the pe titioners herein.

¶23

On thr: other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for grant of bail to the peritioners on the ground thrlt the allegation levelled against the petitioners

!, ,*g

KL, J Crl P.No.3306 0f2020

¶28

is serious in nature and that the contraband seized from the possession of the petitioners is a commercial quantity.

¶29

A perusal of the record shows that the petitioners are in jail from 17.06.2020. Except the present case, there is no other case of similar nature is pending against the petitioners.

¶30

Considering the said aspects and also the aspect that the petitioners have not involved in any case of simiiar nature, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners herein.

¶31

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioners/A-l and A-2 shall be released on bail on their executing separate personal bonds for a slrm of Rs.15,000/(Rupees fifteen thousand only) each with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Zaheerabad, Sangareddy District. The

¶32

petitioners/A- 1 and A-2 sha1l report before the SHO, Jharasangam Police Station, Sangareddy District, every Sunday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier. Further, the petitioners/A- 1 and A-2 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 438 (2\ Cr.P.C and shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the CASC.

¶33

KL, J Crl.P No 1306 or'2020

I il

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal

¶39

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶40

(

¶41

Sl)/- K.AMMAJL - /< ASSIST^NT RECISTRA/ A./

//TRUE COPY//

\q,

SECTION OFFICER

To,

l. The I Addl. Dis:rrct and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy

¶47

The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Zaheerabad, Sangareddy District.

¶48

li. The Superintenderit.. District Jail, Sangareddy, Sangareddy District.

¶49

l'he Station Horrse ol'llcer. Jharasangam Police Station, Sangareddi District.

¶50

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Couft of Telangana, at t{;-derabad (OUT)

¶51

one CC to Sri K.l-axmaiah, Advocate (OPUC)

¶52

One Spare Cop'

,*.,

HIGH COUIi.l'

KL,.I

DATE: l7-9-2020

oRl)Bll

CRL.P. NO.3306 0F 2020

¶60

c E(
1
q
o
M
oof 1 1 SIP .D
at
t
t
oesper9

¶61

BAIL

Chinna Rathod Vinod Kumar v. the State of Ts

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinna Rathod Vinod Kumar v. the State of Ts

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

Dara Ragini Vs The State of Telangana

Jakkula Chandraiah and 2 others Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Yousuf Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Bonala Rajamani Vs State of Telangana

Angothu Ramu Vs The State of Telangana

B. Ramesh Babu Vs Vakula Devi