Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Sobha Bheemanna vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 August, 2025
APHC010360682025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3521]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7691/2025
Between:
1. SOBHA BHEEMANNA, S/O. GANGADHAR, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/O. RANGILISINGI VILLAGE, DARELA POST, MUNCHINGIPUT
MANDAL, ALLURI SITHARAMA RAJU DISTRICT, PRESENTLY
RESIDING AT SF-5, BLOCK NO.41, Y.S.R. COLONY,
MARIKAVALASA, MADHURAWADA, VISAKHAPATNAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT
2. SRAVAN RAM GOUNDI,, S/O. LATE RAM, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/O. IDPL, KUKATPALLI, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA STATE.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED(S)
AND
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High
Court of Andhra Pradesh
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused(S):
ADAPA SUDHAKAR RAO
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
2
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7691 of 2025
Dated 28.08.2025
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 and 2 on
bail in Cr.No.45 of 2025 of Anandapuram Police Station, Visakhapatnam
Commissionerate, registered against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2
herein for the offences punishable under Section 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 25.02.2025, on receipt of
credible information regarding illegal possession and transportation of
ganja, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Anandapuram Police Station, along with
his staff and mediators, rushed to NH-16 near Bheemili Cross Road
Junction and conducted vehicle checking. The police noticed one auto
coming from the Anandapuram side towards P.M. Palem, and on seeing
the police, the persons in the auto attempted to escape. The police
apprehended three persons who were in the auto. During investigation,
Accused Nos.1 to 3 disclosed their address particulars and, basing on their
3
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7691 of 2025
Dated 28.08.2025
confession statements, 26 Kgs of ganja was seized under the cover of a
mediators’ report.
3. Sri Adapa Sudhakar Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioners
contend that the petitioners are innocent of the alleged offence and have
been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the
petitioners are the sole earning members of the family and, therefore, their
incarceration would cause undue hardship to their dependents. The
petitioners undertake to strictly adhere 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 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 submissions, it is urged that the
petition be dismissed.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned
Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.
4
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7691 of 2025
Dated 28.08.2025
6. As seen from the record, the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 were
allegedly indulged in dealing with 26.00 kgs of ganja, which is a
commercial quantity. The petitioners have been languishing in jail since
25.02.2025. Nearly for the past 184 days they have been in judicial
custody. The petitioner/Accused No.1 is a resident of Marikavalasa,
Madhurawada, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. The
petitioner/Accused No.2 is the resident of IDPL, Kukatpalli, Hyderabad,
Telangana State. The material portion of the investigation is completed. All
the witnesses of the prosecution are official witnesses. Hence, the question
of the petitioners influencing or threatening the witnesses or hampering the
investigation may not arise.
7. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that there are no
adverse antecedents against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 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.
8. Section 36A(4) of ‘the NDPS Act‘ states that if the investigation is not
completed within 180 days, the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 has an
indefeasible right to bail, unless the Special Court extends the period up to
5
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7691 of 2025
Dated 28.08.2025
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. Considering the period of detention undergone by the
petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 in judicial custody for the past 184 days,
the nature and gravity of allegations 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 and 2 shall be enlarged on
bail subject to they executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), each with two sureties
each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned XV
Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Bheemunipatnam,
Visakhapatnam City.
ii. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not leave the
limits of the District without prior permission from the Station
House Officer concerned.
6
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7691 of 2025
Dated 28.08.2025iv. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 shall not commit or
indulge in commission of any offence in future.
v. The petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 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 petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 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.
10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
_________________________
DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Date: 28.08.2025
RSI
7
Dr. YLR, J
Crl.P.No.7691 of 2025
Dated 28.08.2025
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7691 of 2025
Date: 28.08.2025
RSI
[ad_1]
Source link