Allowed

Yunus Malik Sayyad v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Sept 2025CRLP/10950/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail petition under the NDPS Act for an accused from whom 4.980 kg of dry ganja was seized, an intermediate quantity. The court granted bail noting material part of investigation was completed and prolonged custody, subject to bond, weekly reporting and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on personal bond of Rs.25,000 with two like sureties, subject to reporting and CrPC/BNSS conditions.

Yunus Malik Sayyad Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.10950 of 2025

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner who are arrayed as accused No.1 in C.O.R.No.203 of 2025 on the file of the Prohibition & Excise Station, Bhadrachalam, registered for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’), on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that on 02.08.2025, on credible information, the police intercepted the accused and seized 4.980 kilograms of dry ganja from Accused No.1 and 8.150 kilograms from Accused No.2, totaling 13.130 kilograms. The accused were subsequently arrested, and a case was registered against them vide C.O.R.No.203 of 2025 for the aforementioned offences.

¶6

Heard Sri B. Muralidhar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Arun Kumar Doddla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

¶7

¶8

SKS,J Crl.P.No.10950 of 2025

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and that the seized contraband is just Intermediate Quantity and that all the material witnesses were examined, and further detention of the petitioner is unnecessary. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 02.08.2025, causing undue hardship to his family and there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

¶10

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that although the seized contraband is of intermediate quantity, the investigation is not yet completed, therefore, granting bail to the petitioner, at this stage, does not arise. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

¶11

Considering the submissions of both learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is observed that the seized contraband falls under the category of intermediate quantity and as the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 02.08.2025, and also material part of the investigation has been completed, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶12

¶13

SKS,J Crl.P.No.10950 of 2025

¶14

i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate at Bhadrachalam.

¶15

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 A.M., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

¶16