Dismissed

Akshya Chandrakanth Kondhalkar and another v. Union of India

Telangana HC23 Feb 2021CRLP/856/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana entertained a bail petition under sections 437 and 439 CrPC filed by two accused charged under NDPS Act. The Court observed that the petitioners possessed a huge quantity of ganja, thereby concluding they are not entitled to bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for bail is rejected; Trial Court directed to conclude trial within four months.

Akshya Chandrakanth Kondhalkar and another Vs Union of… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 856 OF 2021

¶7

Between:

¶8

Akshya Chandrakanth Kondhalkar, S/o. Chandralcanth Kondhalkar, Aged 25 years, Tal, Bhor, Near Bhuvasaheb Wadi , Kambre Kheda Karandi (Kh edaeber) Karandi Khedaeber, Pune, [t4aharashtra.

¶9

Adinath Dnyaneswer Shinde alias Rohit Shinde, S/o. Dnyaneswer Shinde, Aged 24 yearc, Fl/o. Mukam, Post-Kamre Kheda , Tal.Dist.Pune, Maharashtra^.

¶10

Petitioner/Accused No.1 and 2

¶11

AND

¶12

Union of lndia, Special Public Prosecutor, Through lntelligence Officer,^Narcotic Control Bureau , Hyderabad, Sub-Zone.

¶13

...RespondenUComplainant

¶14

Petition under Section 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C^prayingthat in^the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the High} Court may be^pleased to enlarge the^{Petitioners/AccusedNo.'1and 2 on bailNCB} F.NO. 48111412020 /NCB/Sub-Zone I^{Hyderabad pending investigationand trial in} the interest of^justice.

¶15

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{uponperusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal Petition and^{upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri G. Prasanth,} Advocate for the Petitioners and^{the SpecialPublic Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondent.

¶16

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶17

THE HONOURABLE^{JUSTICEG. SRI DEVI}

¶18

CRIMI NAL^{PETITIONN o.856of2021}

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

This Criminal^{Petition,under Sections437 and439 of the Codeof} Criminal Procedure,^{1973,is filedby the petitionersiAl and A2 seeking to} grantbailtotheminconnectionwithNCB.F.No'4Bl1l4l202olNcB/sub. zonelHyderabad,^{registeredfor the offences punishableunder} Sections 8(c)^{read with Section 20(b) of NDPSAct, 1985'}

¶21

Heard leamed^{counsel appearing for the petitioners/A'landA2'} learned Special^{Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-Stateand} perused the record.

¶22

Learned counsel^{for the petitioners submitsthat the petitionersare} innocent of the^{alleged offences and they are nothingto do with the} alleged crime^{and in order harass them, policehave implicatedtheir} namesinthepresentcrime.Hefurthersubmitsthatthepetitionersare eking out their^{livelihoodby working as driver and clear and no contraband} was seized from^{their possessionandthat they never involvedin any such} crime.Healsosubmitsthatthepetitionersarelawabidingcitizensand ready to abide^{by any condition imposedby this Court in the event of their} enlargement on^bail.

¶23

Learned Special^{Public Prosecutor vehemently opposedthe bail} application^{by filing counter and submitsthat on appreciationof material} available on^{record,this court dismissedthe bail applicationfiled by the} '1"1 petitioner/A'l vide order daled 11 .02.2021^{in Crl'P No' 562of 2021} '^l1e alsosubmitsthatasthechargesheethasalreadybeenSubmitted,thetrial commence and^{conclude the trial as}

¶24

Court may be^directedto expeditiouslY^as Possible.

¶25

As seen from^{the contents of the remandreport' the accused were} carrying huge^{quantity of ganja weighingabout 955 5 kgs from}

¶26

¶27

Visakhapatnam to Maharastra. Thus, looking^{into the nature of allegations} leveled against the^{petitioners/Al} and^{A2, I am not inclinedto grant bail to} the petitioners at this stage, and accordingly,^{their prayer for bail is} rejected. However, since charge sheet^{has already been filed in this case,} the trial Court is directed to commence^{and conclude the trial as} expeditiously as^{possible, preferablywithina period of four months from} the date of receipt of a copy of this order^{without giving unnecessary} adjournments to either of the^parties.

¶28

With the aforesaid directions, the Criminal^{Petition is disposed of.}

¶29

Miscellaneous applications, if any^{pending in this criminal}

¶30

petition, shall stand closed.

¶31

SD/. K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

¶32

//TRUE COPY//

¶33

SECTI OFFICER

¶34

to',,. ,n" XX1V Additionar Metroporitan Magistrate, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy

¶35

,. ?ittlit"u"oolitan^{Sessions Judge' cvberabad'Ranga ReddyDistrict'at L B'}

¶36

|;:T;p"ri"tendent^{cherlapallv Jail' Ranga Reddv District' Hvderabad'} 4. The lntelligence^{Otic"t,'iiJt"o'ticControl-Bureau' Hyderabad' Sub-Zone'} i. o"J ddtJsti^{G Prasanth, AdvocatetoPUCl}

¶37

Two^{CD CoPies} MMK

kN)

HIGH COURT

DATED:23/0212021

1 t{e s'la r€
(
oo 0 4 fiAB 2021 oz
j<br>

P/rTC

¶42

ORDER

¶43

CRLP.No.856 of 2021

¶44

DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL^PETITION

¶45

.)r<br>

Akshya Chandrakanth Kondhalkar and another v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshya Chandrakanth Kondhalkar and another v. Union of India

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

Thati Jaya Prakash , Yesunadham Vs State of Telangana

Kalluri Kiran Vs State of Telangana

E.Srinivas Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Aadil Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana

Kamakshi Ranganathan Vs State of Telangana

Kattamuri Sandeep Vs The State of Telangana