Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Shaik Riyaz vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 5 August, 2025
APHC010363592025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3521]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7589/2025
Between:
Shaik Riyaz and others ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
Gollapalli Maheswara Rao
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
480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity
‘the BNSS’), seeking to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 on bail
in Cr.No.28 of 2024 of III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam
Commissionerate, registered against the Petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 to 3
herein for the offences punishable under Section 20 (b) (ii)(C) read with
2
Dr.YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7589 of 2025
Dated 05.08.2025
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 05.02.2025, on receipt of
credible information regarding the illegal possession and transportation of
ganja, the Sub-Inspector of Police, III Town Police Station, along with his
staff, secured the presence of mediators, rushed to Razmattaz Wedding
Events Service Road, beside Madhuri’s Kitchen Apartment, Balajinagar,
Siripuram, Visakhapatnam. The police noticed one two persons on
motorcycle and one person on scooty, on seeing the police, the accused
persons tried to escape. The Sub-Inspector of Police apprehended the
Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 and found in their possession 3,000 ml of
Liquid Cannabis (Hashish), seized the contraband under a cover of
mediators’ report, and arrested them.
3. Sri G. Maheswara Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioners contends
that the petitioners are innocents of the alleged offence and have been falsely
implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the petitioners are the sole
earning member of their family and, therefore, their continued incarceration
would cause undue hardship to their dependents. The petitioners undertakes
to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. In light
of the foregoing, learned counsel prays that the present petition be allowed in
the interest of justice.
3
Dr.YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7589 of 2025
Dated 05.08.2025
4. Per contra, Ms. P.Akhila Naidu, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor
vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners, submitting that the
investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be
examined. It is contended that if the petitioners are released on bail at this
stage, there is a strong likelihood that they may abscond, thereby hampering
the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law. In view of the
foregoing, it is urged that the petition be dismissed.
5. As seen from the record, the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 were
indulged in transportation and possession of 3,000 ml of Liquid Cannabis
(Hashish). Although it is commercial quantity, the petitioners have been
languishing in the jail since 05.02.2025 onwards. Nearly for the past 180 days
they have been in the judicial custody. The investigating officer has not filed
charge sheet in this case. Material portion of investigation is completed. All the
witnesses of the prosecution are official witnesses. Hence, the question of
petitioners influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the
investigation may not arise.
6. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are no
adverse antecedents against the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 and no report
was filed before the learned Court below by the learned Public Prosecutor
concerned seeking for extension period of judicial custody of the petitioners
upto one year by indicating the progress of investigation and the specific
reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period.
4
Dr.YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7589 of 2025
Dated 05.08.2025
7. Section 36A(4) of ‘the Act’ states that if the investigation is not
completed within 180 days, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 have 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
Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in judicial custody for the past 180 days, the
nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioners, and their
alleged role played in the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners
on bail with the following stringent conditions:
i. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall be enlarged on bail
subject to they executing a personal bond for a sum of
Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), each with two
sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the
learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Judge
for Trial of Offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam.
ii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall appear before
the Station House Officer, III Town Police Station,
Visakhapatnam Commessionerate, on every Saturday in
between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the
learned the Trial Court.
5
Dr.YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7589 of 2025
Dated 05.08.2025iii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not leave the limits
of the District without prior permission from the Station House
Officer concerned.
iv. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall not commit or
indulge in commission of any offence in future.
v. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 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.
vii. The Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 shall surrender their
passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that they
do not have a passport, they shall submit an affidavit to that
effect to the Investigating Officer.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
_________________________
DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Date: 05.08.2025
KMS
6
Dr.YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7589 of 2025
Dated 05.08.2025
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7589 of 2025
Date: 05.08.2025
KMS