Krishna Kumar Alias Kishan vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 18 July, 2025

Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati

Krishna Kumar Alias Kishan vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 18 July, 2025

 APHC010332262025

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                                   AT AMARAVATI                         [3521]
                            (Special Original Jurisdiction)

                    FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY
                      TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
                                  PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
                      CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6887/2025
Between:
   KRISHNA KUMAR ALIAS KISHAN, S/0. PRABHURAM AGE 20 YEARS,
   R/O.NAVAPURA VILLAGE, BINAMAL MANDAL, JALORE DISTRICT,
   RAJASTHAN
                                                  ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
                                     AND
   THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep. By its Public Prosecutor,
   High Court of at Amaravathi Through Station House Officer, l-Town Police
   Station, NTR District.
                                           ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS
praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of
Criminal Petition, the High Courtmay be pleased to enlarge the Petitioners on
Regular Bail accused in Crime No.9/2025 filed U/s 8 (c), R/w 20 (b) (ii) (C) of
the NDPS Act 1985 in l-Town P.S on 21-01-2025 and pass such
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:

DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following ORDER:

The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity „the BNSS‟), seeking to

enlarge the petitioner/Accused No.1on bail in Cr.No.09 of 2025 of I Town
2
Dr.YLR,J
Crl.P.No.6887/2025

Police Station, Vijayawada City, registered against the petitioner/Accused

No.1 herein for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with

20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for

brevity „the NDPS Act‟).

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that on 21.01.2025, the

Inspector of Police along with the mediators and staff found a Swift D zire car

bearing No.GJ 05 JQ4115. In the back trunk of the car, the police found three

large bags, which smelled like ganja. When the police examined a bag, it was

written as “Varun feeds quality products S.V. Special plastic fertilizers bag”

and when they opened the bag, there were 12 small bundles packed with

brown coloured plaster. The plastic bag contained 12 packets of ganja which

weighed about 29.940 grams. The police checked second bag that is blue

colour dustbin garbage bag and fertilizer plastic bag, and found 15 small

bundles packed with brown colour plaster which weighed about 32.640 grams

without bag. When the police opened the third bag that is while colour plastic

bag, they found 20 small bundles packed with brown colour plaster which

weighed about 44.640 grams with bag and 42.800 grams without bag.

When the Police opened the dash board of the car, they found

petitioner‟s Aadhaar card, PAN card, Minerva Grand tax invoice bills. As

observed through CC camera, it was seen two persons coming on Splendor

motor cycle bearing No.AP 39 BY 4997 who opened the trunk of the car and

carried two bags on the cart. During theinvestigation, the two persons were

identified as Krishna Kumar/petitioner herein and Arjun.The Police seized the
3
Dr.YLR,J
Crl.P.No.6887/2025

ganja weighing 101 kilo grams, car bearing No.GJ 05 JQ 4115 and registered

a case.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant

Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

4. Ms. Devasri Roshan Kancharla, the learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence; petitioner was

falsely implicated by the police in the crime; petitioner is the sole breadwinner;

petitioner would abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court; and

urged to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor, opposed in granting of bail stating that some more material

witnesses have to be examined; investigation is not completed; if the

petitioner is enlarged on bail, he would not be available for the investigation

and he would escape from the clutches of law; and urged to dismiss the bail

petition.

6. As seen from the record, the petitioner/Accused No.1was indulged in

transportation and possession of 101 kgs of ganja. Although it is commercial

quantity, the petitioner has been languishing in the jail since 21.01.2025

onwards, nearly 178 days he has been in the judicial custody. The

investigating officer has not filed charge sheet in this case.

7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are no

adverse antecedents against the petitioner/Accused No.1, and no report was
4
Dr.YLR,J
Crl.P.No.6887/2025

filed before the learned Court below by the learned Public Prosecutor

concerned seeking for extension period of judicial custody of the petitioner

upto one year by indicating the progress of investigation and the specific

reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period.

8. Section 36A(4) of „the Act‟ states that if the investigation is not

completed within 180 days, the petitioner/accused 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.

9. Keeping in view of the period of detention undergone by the petitioner in

judicial custody for more than 178 days, the nature and gravity of allegation

levelled against the petitioner, and his alleged role in the case, this Court is

inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions:

i. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject

to he executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/-

(Rupees fiftythousand only), with two sureties each for the like

sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge for trial

of „the NDPS Act‟ cases-Cum-II Additional District & Sessions

Judge, Vijayawada.

ii. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the

Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Vijayawada, on
5
Dr.YLR,J
Crl.P.No.6887/2025

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.1 shall not leave the limits of the

District without prior permission from the learned Special Judge

for trial of NDPS Act cases-Cum-II Additional District & Sessions

Judge, Vijayawada.

iv. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in

commission of any offence in future.

v. The petitioner/Accused No.1 shall cooperate with the

investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall

make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating

officer as and when required.

vi. The petitioner/Accused No.1shall 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.

vii. The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, to the

investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have a

passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the

Investigating Officer.

10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

________________________
Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Dated: 18.07.2025
6
Dr.YLR,J
Crl.P.No.6887/2025

KAS