Allowed

R. Venkata Krishnaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Feb 2021CRLP/178/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the accused No.1 charged with transporting narcotic substances under the NDPS Act. The court quashed the holding order and fixed terms for release including personal bond and appearance before investigating authorities.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; accused released on bail with personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties, and various conditions.

R. Venkata Krishnaiah Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

:PRESENT:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI

¶6

CRL.P. NO: L78 OF 2O2l

¶7

Between:

¶8

R. Venkata Krishnaiah, S/o. Koteshwar Rao

¶9

Petitio n e r/Acc u sed No.1

¶10

AND

¶11

The State ofTelangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, Through P.S. Excise Quthbullapur, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad

¶12

. .. . Respondent

¶13

Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the petition filed herein, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioher/Accused No.1 on bail in connection with the CR. No. 32 of 2020 on the file of the Police Station P.S. Excise Quthbullapur, P and E Station.

¶14

The petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri R Anurag, Advocate for the Petitioner, and of Additional Public Prosecutor^for the respondent, the Court made the following.

¶15

ORDER

¶16

HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CR:MINAL PETITION NO.178 OF 2O2I

ORDER:

t I

I t

The petition,:r/A- 1 filed the present Criminal Petition under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure^{seeking to} grant bail to him in Crime No.32 of 2O2O of P.S. Quthbullapur, Medchal District, which was registered for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 22(c) ofthe NDPS Act, 1985.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the^{petitioner/A-1,} the learned Additional Prosecutor representing the respondent-State and^perused the record.

¶22

The allegation against the petitioner/A- 1 is that on 25.09.2O2O, on credible information about the accused transporting intoxicating chemical substanc es, the Excise officials conducted route watch at Raghavendra Bhavan, Gandimisamma X Road and found the accused persons in possession of 1 .2 10 Kg CLOBAZAM zrnd they confessed to have purchased the same from A-3 for Rs.3,00,000/ - per Kg and hence, they arrested the accused.

¶23

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed to grant bail to the petitioner/A- 1.

¶24

Learnecl counsel for the petitioner/A- 1 submits r-hat the petitioner has not committed any offence as alieged by the prosecution and he is falsely implicated in the above case. The petitioner/A- 1 is in custody since 16.10.2020. Hence, it is prayed to consider the petitic,ner's application for bail.

¶25

Looking intc, the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the gravity of the offence alleged and as

¶26

¶27

¶28

there are no previous criminal antecedents, I am inclined to grant

¶29

bail to the petitioner/ A- I .

¶30

The Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioner/A-1 shall be

¶31

released on bail on the following terms and conditions:

¶32

(i) That the petitioner/A-l shall execute a personal bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar;

¶33

(ii) That the petitioner/A- 1 shall appear before the investigating authorities on every Saturday between 10.00 am and 5.00 pm till conclusion of investigation and submission of final report;

¶34

(iii) That the petitioner/A- 1 shall not indulge in similar type of activities in future and if it is found that he is indulged in similar type of activities in future, the liberty granted to him shall automatically stand cancelled and he would be taken into custody forthwith.

¶35

(iv) that the petitioner/A- 1 shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶36

(") that the petitioner/A- 1 shall co-operate with the investigating agency.

¶37

("i) that the petitioner/A- 1 shall not misuse the liberty granted to him.

¶38

(vii) that the petitioner/A- 1 shall appear before the Court concerned personally on each date of hearing till conclusion of trial.

¶39

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shail stand closed.

sD/- K.SHYLESHI

ASSISTANT

//rRUE^COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

.-.--r..-

1 The Metropolitan Sessions ludge, Cyberabad, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar 2 The XXI Metrop()litan Magistrate, Medchal

¶48

3 The Su pe rinte n(lent, Cherlapally Jail, R.R.District 4 The Station House Officer, Police Station P.S. Excise Quthbullapur, P and E Station, R. R. Dislrict

¶49

5 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad IOUT)

¶50

6 One CC to Sri R Anurag, Advocate (OPUC) 7 One spare copy.

HIGH COURT

GSD,J

DATED: O4,O2.2O1ll

ORDER:

CRLP. NO: L78 ot 2O2l

¶56

-s .r
<br>a

¶57

BAIL

R. Venkata Krishnaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Venkata Krishnaiah v. The State of Telangana

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

Guguloth Heerala, Heeru , Veeranna and 2 Others Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Hakeem Vs The State of Telangana

Chinthapandu Suresh and another Vs The State of Telangana

Gopisetti Nagendra Prasad Vs The State of Telangana

Sode Lingaiah , Tula Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana