Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Konta Lakshman Rao Alias Lakshman vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 August, 2025
APHC010377962025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3521]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7759/2025
Between:
KONTA LAKSHMAN RAO ALIAS LAKSHMAN, S/O LATE NARAYANA,
AGED 34 YEARS, R/O BOORUGUVEEDHI VILLAGE, LINGETI
PANCHAYAT PEDABAYALU MANDAL, ASR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High
Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravathi.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
K K KOMALAN
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 437 and 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’)/ Sections
2
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7759 of 2025
Dated 19.08.2025
480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity
‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in
Cr.No.1091 of 2020 of Chodavaram Police Station, Visakhapatnam
District, registered against the petitioner/Accused No.2 herein for the
offences punishable under Section 20 (b) (i), 20 (b)(ii)(C) read with 8 (c) of
the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the
NDPS Act‘).
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.10.2020, at about 12.00
hours, on receipt of credible information about the illegal possession and
transportation of ganja, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Chodavaram Police
Station, along with his staff and mediators, rushed to Kothuru Junction,
Chodavaram Village and Mandal, and conducted vehicle checking. The
police noticed three persons, who, on seeing the police, they tried to
escape. The police apprehended two of them and found 200 kgs of Ganja,
and arrested accused No.1. The present petitioner was shown as accused
No.2 based on the confession statement of accused Nos.1 and 3.
3. Sri K.K.Komalan, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and has been falsely
implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole
earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause
undue hardship to his dependents. The petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere
3
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7759 of 2025
Dated 19.08.2025
to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light of the foregoing
submissions, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in the
interest of justice.
4. Per contra, Ms.P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitting that the
investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be
examined. It is contended that if the petitioner is released on bail at this stage,
there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the
ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the foregoing
submissions, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.
5. As seen from the record, the petitioner/Accused No.2 was indulged in
possession and transportation of 200.00 kgs of ganja. Although it is a
commercial quantity, the petitioner has been languishing in jail since
29.10.2024. Nearly for the past 280 days he has been in judicial custody.
Accused Nos.1 and 3 gave statements against the petitioner. The
petitioner/Accused No.2 is a permanent resident of Booruguveedhi Village,
Lingeti Panchayat, Pedabayalu Mandal, ASR District. Against accused Nos.1
and 3 charge sheet was filed, while the petitioner was shown as absconding at
the time of filing of charge sheet. Now another charge sheet has to be filed
against the petitioner. The material portion of the investigation is completed.
All the witnesses of the prosecution are official witnesses. Hence, the question
4
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7759 of 2025
Dated 19.08.2025
of the petitioner influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the
investigation may not arise.
6. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are no
adverse antecedent against the petitioner/Accused No.2 and a petition for
seeking extension of remand of the petitioner, but it was dismissed by the
learned Trial Court.
7. Section 36A(4) of ‘the NDPS Act‘ states that if the investigation is not
completed within 180 days, the petitioner/Accused No.2 has an indefeasible
right to bail, unless the Special Court extends the period up to one year on the
report of the Public Prosecutor, indicating the progress of the investigation and
specific reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period.
8. Considering the period of detention undergone by the
petitioner/Accused No.2 in judicial custody for the past 280 days, the nature
and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, and his alleged role
played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with
the following stringent conditions:
i. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall be enlarged on bail
subject to he executing a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum
each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial First Class
Magistrate-Cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Chodavaram.
5
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7759 of 2025
Dated 19.08.2025ii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall appear before the
Station House Officer concerned on every Saturday in between
10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned
the Trial Court.
iii. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not leave the limits of the
District without prior permission from the Station House Officer
concerned.
iv. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not commit or indulge
in commission of any offence in future.
v. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall cooperate with the
investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall
make himself available for interrogation by the investigating
officer as and when required.
vi. The petitioner/Accused No.2 shall not, directly or
indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her
from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
_________________________
DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Date: 19.08.2025
RSI
6
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7759 of 2025
Dated 19.08.2025
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7759 of 2025
Date: 19.08.2025
RSI