High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 11 AP CK 0649

ASAB UDDIN, S/O Abdul Matinage vs Union Of India Through Inspector, Narcotics Control Bureau, NCB Visakhapatnam Zonal Unit, Visakhapatnam

Andhra Pradesh High Court · Decided on 25 November 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr Y. Lakshmana Rao, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Petition No: 11180 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 569 words

Dr Y. Lakshmana Rao, J

1.

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 on bail in NCB/VSZU/Cr.No/02/2025 of NCB Visakhapatnam Zonal Unit Police Station, Visakhapatnam, registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(b) 28 & 29 read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. Perused the record.

3.

Mr. Suresh Kumar Routhu, the learned Special Public Prosecutor for NCB, submits that the petitioner has a propensity for escaping from the custody of the NCB officials. In fact, that occurred on 09.04.2025. Of course, later, he himself appeared before the Investigating Officer on 17.07.2025 at East Police Station, Dimapur, Nagaland, and rendered his voluntary statement.

4.

As seen from the record, the allegation against the petitioner is that he was allegedly indulged in dealing with possession and transportation of 11.00 Kgs of Ganja. It is a non‑commercial quantity. Originally, the petitioner was remanded on 08.04.2025. Later, he escaped from the custody of the NCB officials on 09.04.2025. Subsequently, he appeared before the Investigating Officer of East Police Station, Dimapur, Nagaland, and rendered his voluntary statement under Section 67 of ‘the NDPS Act’, in which he admitted his involvement in trafficking of Ganja. Based on his voluntary statement and other material available, he was arrested on 17.07.2025 for contravention of the provisions of Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B), 28 and 29 of ‘the NDPS Act’, and he was sent to the custody of the NCB officials. After completion of thorough investigation, charge sheet has been filed. It will take considerable length of time for the learned Trial Court to take up the matter and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Until such time, keeping the petitioner in judicial custody would not serve any purpose. The petitioner is the permanent resident of Lanka Hojai, Assam. He has got fixed abode. If certain stringent conditions are imposed on the petitioner, he would abide by them and make himself available for the trial.

5.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the Petitioner/Accused, this Court is inclined to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail.

6.

In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed with the following stringent conditions:

i. The Petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to him executing bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

ii. The Petitioner/Accused shall appear before the learned Trial Court on every adjournment without fail.

iii. The Petitioner/Accused shall appear before the NCB Officials every first Friday of the month between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., until cognizance is taken by the learned trial court.

iii. The Petitioner/Accused shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the learned Trial Court.

iv. The Petitioner/Accused shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future.

v. The Petitioner/Accused 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.