Allowed

Mandem Deepak v. The State Of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Jul 2025CRLP/7987/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail petition under BNSS Sections 480/483 for accused No.1 in an NDPS case involving seizure of 0.003 grams LSD, an intermediate quantity. Court granted bail on a Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties, weekly appearance for six weeks, and standard Section 483(3) conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioner/accused No.1 on personal bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, subject to appearance conditions and Section 483(3) BNSS conditions.

Mandem Deepak Vs The State Of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7987 of 2025

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) seeking bail to the petitioner/accused No.1 in C.O.R.No.46 of 2025 on the file of the Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Uppal, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w. 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’).

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that on 29.05.2025 at about 07:30 pm, STF Hyderabad Team (A) conducted raides behind Madhura Restaurant and Bar and detected a case of illegal possession of LSD blots from the petitioner and seized 10 blots, each containing 300 micrograms LSD, and also one mobile phone from the possession of the petitioner and arrested him and handed over the case papers, contraband and the petitioner in the Excise

¶6

¶7

Station, Uppal. Basing on the said complaint, present crime is registered.

¶8

Heard Mr. S. Chandra Mohan Reddy, learned counsel

¶9

for the petitioner, and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has not committed alleged offences and he was falsely implicated in the above said crime. The police have not followed the mandatory procedure while conducting search and seizure of the contraband under the NDPS Act. Hence, the ingredients under the provisions of the NDPS Act are not attracted against the petitioner. Even according to the prosecution, the contraband was seized in the present crime is 10 blots, each containing 300 micrograms LSD, in total 0.003 grams, which is intermediate quantity. The petitioner was arrested on 29.05.2025 and since then, he is in judicial custody. The petitioner is prosecuting B.Sc. H & HA, Hotel Management

¶11

¶12

Course III year. The petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and also abide by the conditions, which are going to be imposed by this Court. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail.

¶13

Per contra , learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner has committed grave offence and the investigation is under progress. At this stage, if the petitioner is released on bail, he will commit the very same offence and also interfere with the investigation. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶14

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner was arrested on 29.05.2025 and since then, he is in judicial custody. The police seized 0.003 grams of LSD, which is intermediate quantity. The record further discloses that the petitioner is prosecuting Hotel Management Course.

¶15

¶16

Taking into consideration the facts and

¶17

circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail in favour of petitioner/accused No.1, subject to the following conditions:

¶18

(i) The petitioner/accused No.1 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 II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-VI Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, MedchalMalkajgiri District at L.B.Nagar.

¶19

(ii) After release, the petitioner/accused No.1 shall appear before the concerned S.H.O. at 11.00 a.m. on every Saturday for a period of six (6) weeks or till filing of the charge sheet, whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

¶20

(iii) After release, if the petitioner/accused No.1 indulges in similar offence, the respondentState is entitled to file an application

¶21

¶22

seeking cancellation of the bail granted by this Court in his favour.

¶23

(iv) The petitioner/accused No.1 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483 (3) of the BNSS.

¶24

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶25

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall

¶26

stand closed.

¶27

_______________________ J.SREENIVAS RAO, J

¶28

Date: 07.07.2025

¶29

mar

Mandem Deepak v. The State Of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandem Deepak 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

Paladi Kalavathi Vs The State of Telangana

Sathyanarayana Thallam Vs The State of Telangana

Ammaram Vinod Vs State of Telangana

Manikanta @ Kota Venkata Manikanta Vs The State of Telangana

Pagidi Ravi Vs The State of Telangana.

Appa Pandranga Pawar Vs The State of Telangana