Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Kalyan Khora, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 16 June, 2025
[3369]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATl
MONDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
:PRESENT.I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5744 OF 2025
Betwee n :
Kalyan Khora, s/o Jagu Khora, Age about 24, Erukujeera vI'IIage, Chatwa
Padua, Koraput DI-Strict, Odisha State. Ph. 9392645303. Aadhar No. 4371
34264547
Petitioner/Accused-2
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, ReP``. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of
Judicature of Andhra Pradesh At Amaravatj.
Respondent/complainant
Petition under sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C, (New Sections 480 & 483
of BNSS, 2023) prayI'ng that I'n the cl-rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed
in support of the criminal Petition, the HI-gh Court may be pleased to release
the petitioner/Accused-2 on baI-I in Cr.No. 27 of 2025 of Araku Poll-Ce Station,
AIluri Seetha Rama Raju District
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRl. KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA
RAJU
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT .I PuBLIC PROSECUTOR
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER
tsgEEseEERE5REE8EEEap
APHCOI O277892025
lN THE Hl,GH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATl [3369]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T MALLIKARJUNA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5744/2025
Between :
Kalyan Khora, ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant
1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition u/Sec.480 and 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed
by the petitioner/A2 seeking regular bail in Cr.No.27/2025 of Araku Police
Station, ASR District.
2. The above said crime was registered against the petitioner and
others for the offence punishable u/Sec.20(b)(ii)(B) r/w 8(c) of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act,1985 (for short {the NDPS Act‘).
3. The case of the prosecution is as follows:
On 01.5.2025 at 9.00 pm, on receipt of credible information about
illegal possession and transportation of ganja, the Sub Inspector of police,
_-J`ct–
e a i-1 a
along with his staff and mediators rushed to Railway Station Junction,Araku valley, and found two persons in suspicious circumstances. On
seeing police, they tried to ran way. Then police apprehended them and
on questioning, they disclosed their identity particulars as that of Al and
A2 and police found 10 kgs of ganja in their possession. Then police
arrested the accused, seized the contraband and sent the accused to
Court for judicial remand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 contended that even according
to the case of the prosecution, the petitioner was arrested when himself
and another person was found in possession of 10 kgs of ganja, which is a
non-commercial quantity and the petitioner is languishing in jail from
01.5.2025 and prays to allow the criminal petition.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed for
grant of bail to the petitioner but fairly conceded that the contraband seized
is below commercial quantity. He further submitted that the petitioner has
no previous antecedents.
6| Heard both sides.
7. Perused the entire material on record.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contraband
alleged to be seized from the possession of the petitioner/A2 and another
person is only 10 kgs of ganja which is not commercial quantity. The
petitioner has been in judicial custody from 01.5.2025 and he is a
permanent resident of Erukujeera Village, Koraput DistrictJ Odisha. As the
contraband seized is not of commercial quantity, no reasons need to be
recorded as contemplated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Most of the
witnesses are shown to b’e official witnesses and the release of the
accused would not cause hampering of investigation and tampering of
evidence. As most of the investigation might have been completed and the
petitioner has permanent abode and there is no possibility of his fleeing
away from justice, as such, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
9. ln the result, the criminal petition is allowed with the following
conditions:
i. The petitioner/A2 herein shall be released on bail on his executing
a personal bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two
(02) sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam;
ii) After release, the petitioner shall attend before the station House
Officer concerned once in a fortnight in between 10.00 am to 01.00 pm for
a period of three (03) months; and
iii) that the petitioner is directed not to hamper the investigation and
temper with the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate for
investigation.
SD/-N.NAGAMMA
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
/ “_`
//TRUE COPY// J,I;Z;i/
For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To]
1. The I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam
2. The superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam
3. The Station House officer, Araku Police Station, Alluri Seetha Rama
Raju District
4. One CC to SRl. KAKUMANU JOJI AMRUTHA RAJU Advocate
[OPUC]
5. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court ofA.P[OUT]
6. One spare copy
HIGH COURT
TMR,J
DATED: 16/06/2025
BAIL ORDER
CRLP.No.5744 of 2025
ALLOWED