Gundlapally Shiva Reddy vs State Of Telangana

Heard Sri V.Sudhakar Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor who is representing the respondent-State.

The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in Crime No.970 of 2022 of Hayathnagar Police Station, has moved the present Criminal Petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

The matrix of the case, as could be perceived through the contents of Part-I Remand Case Diary, is that the petitioner and accused No.3 hail from the same village. Both of them got acquainted with accused No.2. All of them decided to purchase ganja from agency areas and sell the same at Hyderabad. Accordingly, they purchased 50 kgs of ganja and loaded the said contraband in a Maruti Brezza vehicle and were proceeding. Accused No.3 got down in the midway. While the petitioner and accused No.2 were going towards Hyderabad, the vehicle was intercepted by Police and the contraband was seized.

Making his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no panchanama was drafted at the scene of offence and the signatures of the panchayatdars were obtained on blank papers and the contents were written in the Police Station. Learned counsel further states that Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees life and personal liberty of the individuals and the same is violated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since more than six months and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

Opposing the submission thus made, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, contends that the contraband which falls within the ambit of commercial quantity was seized from the possession of the petitioner. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also states that the petitioner has got criminal antecedents and earlier also, he was involved in another NDPS case vide a case in Crime No.175 of 2016 of Central Crime Station, Hyderabad and in the said case also, the allegation is that the petitioner has committed the offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with 20 (b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Record discloses that earlier, the petitioner moved an application vide Criminal Petition No.10333 of 2022 seeking bail and the same was dismissed by order dated 12.12.2022. No change of circumstances is projected. Also, the case is hit by Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the request of the petitioner cannot be honoured.

Resultantly, this Criminal Petition stands dismissed.