Dr Y. Lakshmana Rao, J
1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity 'the Cr.P.C.')/ Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 'the BNSS'), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in Cr.No.136 of 2025 of Prohibition & Excise Police Station, Rampachodavaram, ASR District, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity 'the NDPS Act').
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.
3. As seen from the record, the petitioner was arrested on 01.07.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 185 days. The allegation against the petitioner/Accused No.2 is that he had allegedly indulged in dealing with 180.00 Kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. The charge sheet has not been filed in this case. There are no similar criminal adverse antecedents reported against the petitioner. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Gadarada Village, Korukonda Mandal, East Godavari District. He has got fixed abode.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was only a passenger in an auto in which Accused No.1 was allegedly transporting 180.00 Kgs of ganja. The petitioner was not aware that ganja was being transported by the other accused. So far, five witnesses are examined. The material portion of the investigation with regard to the alleged role played by the petitioner/Accused No.2 is completed. All the prosecution witnesses are official witnesses. Hence, the question of the petitioner influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the investigation may not arise.
5. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are no adverse antecedents against the petitioner/Accused No.2 and no report was filed before the learned Court below by the learned Public Prosecutor concerned seeking for extension period of judicial custody of the petitioner upto one year by indicating the progress of investigation and the specific reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period.
6. Section 36A(4) of 'the NDPS Act' states that if the investigation is not completed within 180 days, the petitioner/Accused No.2 has an indefeasible right to bail, unless the Special Court extends the period up to one year on the report of the Public Prosecutor, indicating the progress of the investigation and specific reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period.
7. Considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner/Accused No.2 in judicial custody for the past 185 days, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the petitioner, and his alleged role played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail with the following stringent conditions:
i. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rampachodavaram, East Godavari District.
ii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall appear before the Station House Officer concerned on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till filing of the charge sheet.
iii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned.
iv. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.
v. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make himself available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required.
vi. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
