Allowed

Rahul Sethi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Sept 2026CRLP/13437/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to the petitioner-accused in an NDPS case involving seizure of ganja. The court acknowledged the investigation was incomplete and imposed strict conditions including appearance before police and a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail subject to personal bond of Rs. 15,000, appearance before SHO on Sundays and Wednesdays, and conditions under BNSS Section 480(3).

Rahul Sethi Vs The State of Telangana — Narcotics (NDPS) | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

¶3

CRIMINAL PETITION No.13437 of 2026

¶4

(CNR.No. HBHC010565202026)

DATE: 09.09.2026

BETWEEN:

Rahul Sethi

…..Petitioner-Accused And

¶9

The State of Telangana, Through Excise P.S.Marredpally, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor.

¶10

…..Respondent-Complainant

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483

¶13

of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner-accused on bail in connection with Crime No.59 of 2026 of Excise Marredpally Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

¶14

¶15

Heard Mr. V.Nitesh, learned counsel for the petitioneraccused and Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent–State.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner-accused is innocent of the alleged offence and he is falsely implicated in the case. There is no prima facie case against the petitioner-accused apart from the alleged confession made by him, which holds no water in the eye of law because it is settled law that confession before the Police Officer is not admissible. Petitioner-accused holds no connection with the alleged persons dealing with the activities and the police has seized 17.420 kgs of ganja, alleging from the petitioner-accused. Petitioner-accused is arrested on 19.06.2026 and remanded to judicial custody on 20.06.2026 and prayed to enlarge the petitioner-accused on bail.

¶17

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the inventory is pending.

¶18

Crime Occurrence Report dated 19.06.2026 goes to show that the petitioner-accused is a labourer and 17.420 kgs of dry ganja was seized from his possession. Petitioneraccused is in jail from 20.06.2026.

¶19

¶20

Petitioner-accused has filed Crl.M.P.No.3008 of 2026 before the II Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Crime No.59 of 2026 for grant of bail and same came to be dismissed vide order dated 15.07.2026, holding that if the petitioneraccused is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility that he may induce or threaten the witness, tamper with the evidence, evade the process of law and commit similar offences.

¶21

The Ganja which is recovered from the possession of the petitioner is 17.420 kgs, which is an intermediate quantity and as per the cause title of the petition, petitioner is a resident of Odisha. Investigation is at the fag end, if conditions are imposed while granting bail, it will meet the ends of justice. Hence, petitioner – accused is entitled to be enlarged on bail, subject to the following conditions:

¶22

i. The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each, with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

¶23

ii. The petitioner-accused shall appear before the concerned SHO between 10.00 a.m. to 05.00 p.m., on every Sunday and Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation and thereafter, as and when required.

¶24

¶25

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

¶26

iv. The petitioner-accused shall not directly or indirectly influence, threaten, or induce any of the prosecution witnesses.

¶27

v. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution is at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶28

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶29

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶30

closed.

¶31

__________________________ B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J Date: 09.09.2026 rsp

¶32

¶33

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO

¶34

CRIMINAL PETITION No.13437 of 2026 (CNR.No.HBHC010565202026)

¶35

DATE: 09.09.2026

¶36

rsp

Rahul Sethi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Sethi 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