Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Sharfaraju Shaik Sharfaraj Ahmed vs The State Of Ap on 17 January, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
CRIMINAL PETITION No.102 OF 2025
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to modify the order, dated
28.08.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No.769 of 2024 (Crime No.16 of 2023 of III Town
Police Station, Visakhapatnam) on the file of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-
cum-I Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Spl.Judge for trial of offences
under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam by reducing the surety amount from
Rs.50,000/- to Rs.5,000/-.
2. Heard. Perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Crime No.16 of 2023
was registered against the petitioner/A.1 by the III Town Police Station,
Visakhapatnam City for the offences punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(b) r/w
8(c) of NDPS Act. The concerned Court while granting bail to the petitioner
initially imposed a condition that the petitioner shall execute a self bond for
Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned
IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam; thereafter, on the
petitioner’s application, the said amount of Rs.1,00,000/- was modified to a sum
or Rs.50,000/-.
2
MRK,J
Crlp_102_2025
4. Learned counsel further submits that the condition imposed by the
Court below is onerous. The petitioner is a poor person and is not in a position to
furnish personal bond and sureties for Rs.50,000/-. The petitioner is in judicial
custody since 31.01.2023. Even though the petitioner was granted bail on
11.03.2024, as he was unable to secure the sureties, he could not be enlarged.
He accordingly prayed to reduce the surety amount from Rs.50,000/- to
Rs.5,000/-.
5. It is apt to mention that way back in 1970’s itself, the Apex Court in
Gudikanti Narsimhulu v. High Court of A.P.1, categorically opined that ‘Heavy
bail from poor man is obviously wrong’.
6. Thus, a pragmatic and purposive import squarely serves the purpose
of ensuring the principle as a ‘Bail is the Rule and Jail is an exception’ and also
another golden rule is ‘excessive bail is no bail’. Recently, the said legal
principles were followed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jalaluddin Khan v.
Union of India2 and in Girish Gandhi v. State of Madhya Pradesh3.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court feels
that the request of the petitioner can be considered.
1
(1978) 1 SCC 240
2
(2024) Livelaw SC 571
3
(2024) 10 SCC 674
3
MRK,J
Crlp_102_2025
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/A.1 is
ordered to be released on bail on execution of personal bond for Rs.5,000/- with
two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the IV Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. The remaining conditions imposed in
Crl.M.P.No.484 of 2024 shall stand good.
_______________________________
MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J
17.01.2025.
Vjl/TJN/PNR
4
MRK,J
Crlp_102_2025
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
CRIMINAL PETITION No.102 OF 2025
17.01.2025
Vjl/TJN/PNR
