Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Akashkuchavadiya Thakur vs State Of Ap on 8 May, 2020
Author: T. Rajani
Bench: T. Rajani
[ 2690 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY :-PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T. RAJANI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1669 OF 2020 Between: 4. AkashKuchavadiya Thakur, S/o. Santhosh Kuchavadiya Thakur, Age 22 Years, R/o. Arjun Nagar, Ward No.12, Kakadhaba, Obedullaganj Village, Raisen District, State of Madhya Pradesh State. 2. SarojKuchavadiya Thakur, W/o. Santhosh Kuchavadiya Thakur, Age 40 Years, R/o. Arjun Nagar, Ward No.12, Kakadhaba, Obedullaganj Village, Raipen District, State of Madhya Pradesh State. 3. VandanaKuchavadiya Thakur, W/o. Ravi Kuchavadiya Thakur, Age 35 Years, Rio. Arjun Nagar, Ward No.12, Kakadhaba, Obedullaganj Village, Raisen District, State of Madhya Pradesh State. ...Petitioner/A1 to A3 AND _ The State of Andhra Pradesh, through Station House officer, Chintapalli Prohibition and Excise Station, Visakhapatnam District, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court At Amaravati. .. Respondent Petition under Section 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to enlarge the Petitioners/A.1 to A.3 on bail in Cr.No.130/2019 on the file of Chintapalli Prohibition and Excise Station, Visakhapatnam District. The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri G Venkata Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and Public Prosecutor for the Respondent, the Court made the following. ORDER:
on SMT JUSTICE T. RAJANI CRIMINAL PETITION No.1669 of 2020 ORDER:
This petition is filed under Sections 437 & 439 Cr.P.C., seeking for grant of bail to the petitioners, who are A.1 to A.3, in Crime No.130 of 2019 on the file of the Station House Officer, Chintapalli Prohibition & Excise Station, Visakhapatnam District, registered for the offences under Sections 8(c) read with 29(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act, 1985.
2. Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.
3. As per the case of the prosecution, 45 Kgs of ganja was seized from the three accused. The counsel for the petitioners argues that if the contraband is divided among all the accused equally, Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be attracted. The Public Prosecutor opposes the bail. This Court is impressed by the said argument, since extent of criminality can be attached based on the fact that out of the total proceeds of the sale of ganja, what the petitioner realises from the sale of the ganja, is only what falls to his share. Apart from the above, it can be seen that the petitioners have been in jail since 25.11.2019. 4, Hence, considering the above, this Court opines that this is a fit case to grant bail to the petitioners.
4. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on condition of his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintapalli, Visakhapatnam District. On such release, the petitioners shall appear before the Station House Officer, Chintapalli Prohibition & Excise Station, Visakhapatnam District, thrice in a week i.e., on every Sunday, Tuesday and Friday between 10.00 am to 01,00 pm, until further orders. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
Sdi- E. KAMESWARA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR o TRUE COPY!! dhe For ASSISTANT R ISTRAR | " 4. The Station House Officer, Chintapalli Prohibition and Excise Station, Visakhapatnam District. _ i il, Vi District.
2, The Su erintendent, Central Jail, Visakhapatnam ) _
3. The judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chintapalli, Visakhapatnam District.
4. One CC to Sri. G Venkata Reddy, Advocate fOPUC]
5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP [OUT]
6. One spare Copy HIGH COURT TRJ DATED:08/05/2020 ORDER CRLP.No.1669 of 2020 DIRECTION Eo ae