Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Murugan vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 8 January, 2024
IN TRE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAYVATI MONDAY, THE EXGHTN DAY OF JANUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR 'PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARJUNA RAO RIMINAL PETITION NO: 9985 OF 2023 Between ¢. Murugan, S/o Mokka, 55 years, G'o Devar, O.No.2-1-02, Mconaticatt, Devaram, Uihmapalayam, Thene District, Tardinadu State. 2. Raja. S/o Chinadevears, aged 54 years, C/Devara, D.No. 3/2/49, Peichiyartinan, Kovil Street, Devaram Ulhanapalayam, Thevaram, Ther: strict, Taminadu State 4 3. P.Prasanth, S/o fslaniewamy, aged 29 years, CiDevar, ve D.Ne.6e Singampatty, Kulakundu Village, Kanthappaketta(O), Niakotlal TR), Hincigal District, Tarmiinadu State. 4. Manmathan, Sfo Chinna Swamy. aged 39 years, C/Devar, Rio D.No.2-1-36, Munandinall, Uthanapalayam, Thevaram, Theni District, Tamilnadu State. .Pattioners/Accusad Nasi fa 4 AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through S.H.O, SES-South, Kakinada, East Gorlavari Disinel, Rep by Ns Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Praciegh, at Armaravaini. . MespondentiCompiginant Petition under Section 447 & 439 of Or PC, praying that in the circumsiances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be Q/Oie4 pleased to release the petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 4 on ball in Cr No 89/2023 on the ide of SEB-South, Kakinada, East Godavari District The petitian caming on for hearing, upon derusing the Petition and the grounds fed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/s P.Madhu Sucthan, Advenaie for the Pellioners and of Public Prosecutor for the Respondent and the
Court made the fallawing HON BLE SRI JUSTICE T. MALLIKARIUNA RAO Criminal Petition No.@905 of 2023 The Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of CrP.C., has bean filed by the Patitioners/Al to Ad, seeking requiar bail, in Crime No.8 fF 23003 of Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Kakinada South, East Godaverl District, registered against the Petitioners and another for the offence punishable under Sections B{c) r/w 20(D)CC) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for shart 'the NDPS Act').
wy 2: Brief facts of the case are that, on 13.10.2023 at about (30 aM., Inspector, SEB Station, Kakinada South, East Godavari District, along with hig staff and mediators went near 17" Kana of Suryaropeta Fly over bridge in Kakinada Town, near Railway Track behind Ghatlamma Teil Terigie on the way to Tawn Railway Station, Kakinada Urban, there Al to AS are found in possession of 28 Kgs of Ganja, The contraband along with other material was seized under the caver of panchanams and Al to A4 were remanded to judicial custacly.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Peliiioners herein were fernanded to judicial custody on 13.10.2023 since then they were languishing in fall. He further submits that the major part of the investigation is also completed.
3ee al Ko
4. On the contrary, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed to grant ball to the Petitioners on the ground that the contraband allegedly seized fram the possession of Petitioners is cornmercial quantity and cannot be apportioned among accused persons soreeitina 5, T have heard both sides.
6, i have peruseci the entire material on record, ?. AS seen from the mediators' renort, while A.l to A.4 were coming from the Town Rallway station, Kakinada Urban, on seeing the Inspector, Special Enfercement Bureau Station, staff and mediators slong with Yahsidar, Ad to A4 tried to return back and they were apprehended by the Police and got recarced thelr confessional statement under the caver of mediator report. The allegation in the mediators' report orima facie shows that A. was found to be in possession of 4 kas of cantraband, A2 was found ta be In possession of 4 kgs of gamia, A.3 was found to be in possession of 10 kgs gania and A.4 was found to be In possession of 10 kas anja.
8. As already observed, the mediators report indicates that the tota! quantity of ganja seized from the four individuals is recorded as 28 kgs. It aiso specified fromm which accused what quantity of gania was seized. No explanation is forthcorning when the prosecution contends that the accused we persons were in agilective posses sof the contraband, way © has been referred so in the mediators report that A.d was found in possession af 4 kas of contraband like so. Besides the : confession shaterients made by the 'accused, there is no other independent evidence to establish that the contraband was collectively acquired by ail the accused in a single transaction. Consequently, reaching a@ prima facie conclusion about the seizure of a commercial quantity of gania from the Petitioners/A.d to Aa becomes difficult to accept.
9. If that be so, even though total quantity as above is a commercial quantity, each of the accused was in mossession af aniy a lesser than the commercial quantity. If the accused were not in possession of the commercial quantity, section 200) Nc} af the NOPS Act wil not aooly,
10. A perusal of the recard shows that the Petitioners were arrested and aA sent to judicial custody on 13.10.2023, and $ then, they are fanquishing in jal. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of view that this is a fit case for granting ball on fatiawing canditions fa) The Patitioners/A.1 to AA shall be released on ball an executing a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) wath two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction af the judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition and Excise-cur- VO Additional Juni vil Judge, Kakinada.
{pb} On release, rhe Petitioners shall appear yefore the Investigating Officer concemed once in a wees Le, On EVEry Sunday between 10.00 AM and 01.00 PM for a gertad af three monins, fc} The Petivoners shail not directly or indirectly contact or threaten the witnesses under any circumstances and ary such attempt shall be construed as an attempt af influencing the witnesses and shall not tamper eviderice and shall co-operate with the investigation.
id} it is made clear that the Petitianers shall scrupulously campy with the above conditions and breach of any of the abave conditions will be viewed seriously and prosecution is at liberty fo rove an anplication for cancellation of the bail.
41. Accordingly, the Criminal Patition is affowed Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this petition, shall stand
- Sdi- G. SRINIVAS REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR .
NTRUE COPY! coh eee SECTION OFFICER Te, 7 wat = - . . . % t z
4. The Judicial sacistrate of First Class for prohibition & gs yinise-CLATE VE Additional Junior Givi Judge, Kakinada.
4 The Superintendent, Central dal, Rajahmundry, a --_ 3 The Station House ofieer, Special enforcement Burcal Station, Kasinca South, East Socayari District.
wee rygarg "hd ads arypray pen EE x & One CC io SRi PP MADHU SUBHAN, Advocate [OPUC} ------ wo CCs fo PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court oF AP., Amaravall. FOOT] Ong gare copy.
HEGH COURT TEA DATEONORO 2084 BAIL ORDER GRLP.No.8805 of 2025 ALLOWED