Allowed

V. Rakesh Kumar , Babloo v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Apr 2021CRLP/892/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court granted bail to accused V. Rakesh Kumar @ Babloo arrested for MDina possession under NDPS Act. Court considered his student status and lack of antecedents, releasing him on Rs. 25k personal bond with two sureties and specific reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with Rs. 25,000 personal bond, two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, weekly reporting, and prohibition from drug-related activities.

V. Rakesh Kumar , Babloo Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

l3ls8 I

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI)

¶3

I'IIIJRSDAY. TTIE EIGTITH DAY OF APRIL TWO I'IIOUSAND AND T['[]NTY ONE

¶4

. :PRESENT:

¶5

THE TIO'BLE JT'STICE^(; SRI DE

¶6

CITINIINALPETITION NO: 892 OF 2021

¶7

Betrveen:

¶8

V. Rakesh Kumar @ Babloo, S/o. V. Rajaiah,

¶9

AND

¶10

: ..,.Petitioner/Accused No. I

¶11

The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S. Panjagutta, Hydglibad, represented by Public Prosecutor. High Court at Hyderabad

¶12

... Respondcnt

¶13

Petition under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criininal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge thc petitioner/Accused No.l. on bail arrested in F.l.R.No. 3 of 2021, of P.S. Panjagutta. IJ1'derabad District. on such ternrs and conditions as this H/n'ble court may deem fit and proper irr thc:ntelcst o [.iustice.

¶14

The petition coming on fbr hearing, upon perusing ther,Petition and the affidavit fiiedⁱⁿ support rhereof and upon hearing the arguments of SRI.K.VENUMADHAV Advocate for the Petitioner and Additional l)ublic Pnrsecutor for Respondent. the Court made the tbllowing.

¶15

OIiI)ER

¶16

HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶17

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.892 OF 2021

¶18

ORDER:

¶19

The petitioner/A- 1 filed the present Criminal Petition under Sections 437 and 439 ol the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking^to grant bail to irim in Crime No.3 of 2O2l of P.S. Panjagutta, Hyderabad, u,hich was registered for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act.

¶20

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

¶21

The allegation against the petitioner/A- 1 is that on 02.Ol.2O2l at 15.00 hours on credible information that two persons are trying to sell MDMA, the police staff proceeded to YSR Statue near Hyderabad Central Shopping Ma1l, Hyderabad and apprehended the petitioner/A-l and seized 15 grams of MDMA from his possession under the cover of panchanama in the presence of mediators and effected his arrest.

¶22

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed to grant bail to the petitioner/A-1 but conceded to the fact that there are no previous criminal antecedents against him.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner/A- 1 submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is falsely implicated in the above case. The

¶24

petitioner/A- t hails from a respectable family. The petitioner/A- 1 has been in custody since O2.O2.202 1 and he has no previous

t--.-_.-d--

criminal antecedents and that the petitioner/A- 1 is a student. Hence, it is prayed to consider the petitioner's application for bail.

¶29

Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case and as there are no previous criminal antecedents against him and as the petitioner is a student, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner/A- 1 .

¶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- 1 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 IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally;

¶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 completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet;

¶34

(iii) That the petitioner/A-l 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- I shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses;

¶36

(v) 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 petitionel/A- 1 shall appear before the Court concerned personally on each date of hearing til1 conclusion of trial.

¶39

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶40

Sd/- M. MANJULA ASSISTANT REGIST R

//TRTiE, COPY//

SECTION OFFI(]T]IT

1 . The I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

¶46

The XIV Additional Chief Metiopolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶47

The IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally Hyderabad.

¶48

The Superintendent, Central PrFon. Chanchalguda. Hyderabad.

¶49

The Station House Of{icer. Fanlagutta Police Station. Hyderabad.

¶50

One CC to SRI.K.VENUMADHAV Adyocate [OPUC]

¶51

fwo CCs to the PIIBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG). High Court at H.vderabad (OUT) 8. One spare copr ,,'

¶52

*.Y:]'......-...

¶53

HIGH COLI{T

¶54

(;SD..I DATED; 08.0.1.2021

¶55

It:l 2Q1 '." /t'' //

¶56

cttL.P.No.892 /ot- 2021 8,.\ IL

V. Rakesh Kumar , Babloo v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Rakesh Kumar , Babloo 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

Kethavath Praveen Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

The State of A.P. Vs Ayyala Santosh Kumar

Smt.P.Satyavathi Vs D.John Vijay Kumar

Shivaji,Kolikineni Shivaji Vs The State of Telangana

T. Durgesh Vs State of Telangana

Sura Saraiah Vs The State of Telangana