Siragam Krishnaveni & Ors. vs State Of Andhra Pradesh

Dr. V.R.K. Krupa Sagar, J

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C. (New Sections 480 and 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), is filed by the petitioners/A.4 and A.5 seeking regular bail in Crime No.117 of 2024 of A.Koduru Police Station, Anakapalli District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) and 25 read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’).

Heard arguments of Sri Sravan Kumar Naidana, the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent-State.

Perused the record.

Record discloses that on 20.09.2024 the police checking party noticed an auto rickshaw bearing No.AP 31 TN 3672 driven by A.2 carrying a few individuals. Males and females were found travelling in the auto rickshaw. On seeing the police party, one of the inmates of that auto jumped out of the auto and escaped. Auto was stopped. On inspection they found sacks full of Ganja in a total quantity of 76 kgs. The contraband was seized. A.2 to A.5 were arrested and were remanded to judicial custody. The present petition is from A.4 and A.5. They seek regular bail.

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that 76 kgs. of Ganja is a commercial quantity and presumption under Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

The submission of the learned counsel for petitioners is that investigation officers violated procedure prescribed under the law. It is specifically argued that the seizing officer himself drew the samples at the spot of seizure and thereby violated Section 52A of the NDPS Act.

Record shows that A.1 and A.6 are absconding. One of them is stated to be Sri Darababu who was the Ganja peddler and the other one is his associate by name Ramakrishna who allegedly jumped out of the auto and escaped. Facts alleged in the record discloses that A.2 and those who are yet to be apprehended were a team and with a view to sell Ganja to purchasers from Tamil Nadu these three persons went to a border area of Andhra Pradesh and Odisha and procured 76 kgs. of Ganja and were bringing it in the auto rickshaw. Enroute, they thought that availability of women in the auto rickshaw would help them to circumvent any checking by law enforcement officers. It was with that purpose they contacted three women who are shown as A.3, A.4 and A.5 to travel with them in the auto rickshaw. Accordingly, those three women boarded the auto rickshaw. While that auto rickshaw was coming, police intercepted it and seized the Ganja. Thus, even according to prosecution, the present petitioners/A.4 and A.5 who are women were mere passengers in the auto rickshaw only because they were invited by A.2 to travel. Therefore, it cannot be said that these petitioners were in conscious possession of Ganja. In such circumstances, when this Court considers the procedural violation, which was argued by the learned counsel for petitioners and when this Court considers the length of detention of these petitioners, it comes to the opinion that any further detention is unnecessary. Hence, prayer is granted.

In the result, this Criminal Petition is allowed in the following terms:

The petitioners/A.4 and A.5 shall be enlarged on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge – cum - Special Judge for trial of offences under NDPS Act, Visakhapatnam.

The petitioners shall mark their attendance before the investigating officer on 1st and 15th of every month between 10.00 AM and 1.00 PM for a period of three months or till filing of the charge sheet whichever is earlier.

The petitioners shall make themselves available for investigation as and when required and they shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any persons acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

The petitioners shall not indulge in similar acts of crime.

The petitioners must regularly participate in the pre-trial and trial process without fail before the competent Court.