Dismissed

Mohd Vasemuddin v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Oct 2021CRLP/7474/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal petition under Section 439 CrPC was filed for bail concerning an offence under the NDPS Act. The petitioner claimed innocence as a vehicle driver. The court dismissed the petition, finding no changed circumstances from a previous order and noting the high gravity of the offence.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition under Section 439 CrPC dismissed; bail refused.

Mohd Vasemuddin Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR or ri.rr#xBltrE^{oF rELANGANA}

¶2

fUONDAY, THE ELEVF r* o rn o-ril'r'o. I IB r#r". ^ ff |,:SIB^r.

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶5

Between:

¶6

CR IM INA L PE TITroN NO:7474 oF2021

¶7

M:[irY;ti1]j*gn, oS/o. Muhasheer, Ased: 35 years, occ; Driver, R/o. e_18-e3,

¶8

AND

¶9

.'.PETITIONERyACCUSED A-l

¶10

I!ffiJ:t"r:lT"riilgijt";X*^{bv its pubric prosecutor,} High court ror the State or

¶11

"'RESP.NDENT/..MPLAINANT

¶12

petition under sectir sta ted i n t h e r\r e m o ra n d,,' :[1j ;tt ;t ;';,: T:l;: jT,J "rff ::TI :IT: pleased to enrarge petitioner/accused A-1 0n bair in coR 39/2021 0n the fire of sHo Bodhan, Nizamabad District.

¶13

This^petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Thakur Roopa Singh, Advocate for the petitioner and the public p rosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Sole Respondent.

¶14

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶15

THE HON'BLE^{DT. JUSTICESHAMEEMAKTHER} CRIMI^NALPETIT I^{ONNo.7474OF202L}

¶16

ORDER:

¶17

This Criminal^{Petition, under Section 439 of the Code of} CriminalProcedure,lgT3,(forshort.Cr.P.C,)isfiledbythe petitioner/A1 for^{grant of bail in COR No'39of 2021 of Prohibition} and Excise^{PoliceStation, Bodhan, registeredfor the offences} punishable under Section^{37(1)(b) ofNarcotic Drugs and} Psychotropic Substances^{Act, 1985 (for short'NDPS Act')'}

¶18

Heard both sides. Perused^{the record.}

¶19

Learned counsel for the^{petitioner/A1} would^{submit thatthe} petitioner/Al is driver of the vehicle in question and he was not aware about the contents of the material being carried on by the other accused in the subject case. The petitioner/A1 is innocent and he has nothing to do with the alleged recovery of ganja. The petitioner/A.1 is falsely implicated in the subject case and ultimately prayed to allow the criminal petition as prayed for.

¶20

On the other hand, Iearned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed grant of bail to the petitioner/A1 and contended that the earlier bail application filed by the petitioner/Al was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.09.2021 passed in Criminal Petition No.3442 of 2027.

¶21

As seen from the material placed on record, the first bail application filed by the petitioner/A.1 was dismissed by this Court vide detailed order dated 21.09.2027 passed in Criminal petition

¶22

¶23

No.3442 of^{2021. This court finds no changed circumstances'The} gravity of the^{offence againstthe petitioner/A'1 is so hlgh' Under} thesecircumstances,itisnotafitcaSetograntbailtothe petitioner/A.1

¶24

6 Accordlngly,^{this Criminal Petition is dismissed'}

¶25

Miscellaneous^{petltions,ifany, pending in this Criminal}

¶26

Petition,^{shall standclosed}

¶27

SD/-K.VENKAIAH ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

//TRUE^COPY/i

! ll'i

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The Special^{Judicial First Class Magistrate for Trial of Prohibition and Excise} Offences,^Bodhan.

¶33

¶34

The Station^{HouseOfficer, Prohibition and Excise' Bodhan'}

¶35

J One CC^{to Sri ThakurRoopaSingh' Advocate IOPUC]} 4. Two CCs^{to the Public Prosecutor'High Court for the State of Telangana at} Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶36

Two CD^CoPies

¶37

One SPare^CoPY s "{

¶38

HIGH COURT

¶39

DATED: 1111012021

¶40

E 51A?{
1
oo \2$ 0$2c?1
<br>l)"-.- "'

¶41

ORDER

¶42

CRLP.No.7474 of 2021

¶43

DISMISS!NG THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶44

B
1)
0

Mohd Vasemuddin v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Vasemuddin 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

Akshay Asthana Vs The State of Telangana

Nilagal Govardhan Reddy Vs The State Of Telangana

SaparapuPhani Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of Telangana

Smt. Radha Shekar Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Anmol Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Ms. Anju Kumar Vs The State of Telangana