Aggi Ashok Goud vs State Of Telangana on 6 March, 2025

0
67

Telangana High Court

Aggi Ashok Goud vs State Of Telangana on 6 March, 2025

        THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA


              CRIMINAL PETITION No.2410 of 2025


ORDER:

Seeking the Court to enlarge the petitioner who is arrayed

as accused in Crime No.517 of 2024 of Afzalgunj Police Station,

Hyderabad, on bail, the present Criminal Petition is filed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 25.11.2024, at

around 11:30 am, the Sub-Inspector of Police at Afzalgunj,

Hyderabad, along with staff, conducted a surprise check at

Mahatma Gandhi Bus Stand (MGBS) and found the

petitioner/A1 in a suspicious condition. The police apprehended

the petitioner and seized 500 grams of Asprazolam. The

petitioner’s confessional statement revealed the involvement of

A2 to A4, leading to the registration of a case under the NDPS

Act, 1985, and the Excise Act.

3. Heard Sri K. Vijaya Bhaskar, learned counsel appearing

on behalf the petitioner as well as Sri Syed Yasar Manoon,

learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the

respondent.

2

SKS,J
Crl.P.No.2410 of 2025

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

manner of his apprehension raises suspicions about the seizure

of the alleged contraband, and a fair reading of the complaint

does not establish a prima facie case against the petitioner. He

further submitted that he is a law-abiding citizen, a permanent

resident of Nandigama Village, and the sole breadwinner of his

family. Despite being innocent, a false case has been filed

against the petitioner. Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant

bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor

opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

petitioner stating that the petitioner is drug peddler. He further

submitted that the investigation is in progress and if the

petitioner is released on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with

the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he prayed

the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.

6. This Court, considering submissions made by both the

learned counsel and reviewing the record, it is noted that the

contention of the petitioner that the case is false, fictitious, and

fabricated, the case was registered without following the due

procedure. However, the Additional Public Prosecutor opposes

bail citing commercial quantity approximately 500 grams of
3
SKS,J
Crl.P.No.2410 of 2025

Asprazolam. At this stage, it is pertinent to note Section 37 of

the NDPS Act, which reads as under:

“37. Offences to be cognizable and non-bailable. —

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of
Criminal Procedure
, 1973 (2 of 1974),–(a) every
offence punishable under this Act shall be cognizable;

(b) no person accused of an offence punishable for
1[offences under section 19 or section 24 or section
27A
and also for offences involving commercial
quantity] shall be released on bail or on his own bond
unless–

(i) the Public Prosecutor has been given an
opportunity to oppose the application for such release,
and

(ii) where the Public Prosecutor opposes the
application, the court is satisfied that there are
reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty
of such offence and that he is not likely to commit any
offence while on bail.

(2) The limitations on granting of bail specified in
clause (b) of sub-section (1) are in addition to the
limitations under the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (2 of 1974) or any other law for the time being in
force on granting of bail.”

7. In view thereof, Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates that

offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailable,

requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty

and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. Given the
4
SKS,J
Crl.P.No.2410 of 2025

serious allegations against the petitioner, this Court is not

satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are

met. Therefore, the criminal petition lacks merit and the same

is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

_______________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 06.03.2025
SAI



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here