Allowed

Golla Bhagaiah v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Feb 2025CRLP/1827/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail petition under the NDPS Act by accused No.7 in Crime No.894 of 2023, Shadnagar Police Station. The court found no incriminating evidence against the petitioner and noted prolonged incarceration without a charge sheet, and granted bail subject to conditions including weekly appearance before police and execution of a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on executing a Rs.25,000 personal bond with two sureties, subject to weekly police appearance for eight weeks and compliance with Section 480(3) BNSS.

Golla Bhagaiah Vs State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1827 of 2025

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No.7 in Crime No.894 of 2023 of Shadnagar Police Station, Ranga Reddy District, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

¶5

The brief facts of the case are that on 25.12.2023, the Shadnagar Police seized the contraband as the accused persons are buying and selling the contraband illegally to the general public in order to earn money in an ease manner and also registered a case vide Crime No.894 of 2023 before the Shadnagar Police, Cyberabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 22(c) and 29 of NDPS Act.

¶6

Heard Sri. Ramakrishna, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner firstly submitted that though it is alleged that the petitioner sold the contraband

¶8

¶9

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1827 of 2025

¶10

which was brought from other accused for gaining profits, no contraband is seized from the petitioner. He secondly submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he is no way concerned with the alleged offences. He thirdly submitted that though there is no corroborative evidence, the petitioner was implicated in the case with false and fabricated allegations. He fourthly submitted that all the material witnesses were examined, and further detention of the petitioner is unnecessary. He fifthly submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 11.12.2024, causing undue hardship to his family. He sixthly submitted that this Court has granted bail to the other accused. He seventhly submitted the petitioner is resident of Kamareddy District, with movable and immovable properties, and is willing to furnish sureties as directed. He lastly submitted that previously, bail applications of the petitioner, vide Crl.M.P.Nos.2563 of 2024, 51 of 2025 and 135 of 2025 were dismissed by the XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, on 03.01.2025, 21.01.2025 and 03.02.2025, respectively, without valid reasons and prayed the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

¶11

¶12

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1827 of 2025

¶13

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that 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.

¶14

After considering submissions from both the parties and reviewing the record, it is apparent that there is no incriminating evidence to prove the alleged offence against the petitioner. It is noteworthy that the petitioner is languishing in jail from 11.12.2024 and no charge sheet is filed till date. Therefore, considering the incarceration period, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶15

i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge-Cum-Additional Metropolitan Session Judge at L.B.Nagar.

¶16

ii. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on

¶17

¶18

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1827 of 2025

¶19

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.

¶20

iii. The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

¶21

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is allowed.

¶22

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶23

closed.

¶24

_______________ K. SUJANA, J

¶25

Date: 12.02.2025 gms

¶26

¶27

SKS,J Crl.P.No.1827 of 2025

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶29

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1827 of 2025

¶30

Date: 12.02.2025

¶31

gms

Golla Bhagaiah v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Golla Bhagaiah v. 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

Sanjay Dhirubhai Gondaliya Vs The State of Telangana

G. Pitchi Reddy, Hyd Vs G.S. Gupta, Hyd and Anr.

Govind @ K.Govind Singh Vs The State of Telangana

Puppala Varun Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Kalapatapu Lakshmi Prasad Vs The State of Telangana

Battula Kishore Vs The State of Telangana