Vakada Pawan Kumar Alias Mukka & Ors. vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh

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 Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 on bail in Crime No.7 of 2026 of Gurthedu Police Station, Polavaram District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) read with 8(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’).

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

Mr.Kadiyam Neelakanteswara Rao, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that he intends to withdraw the petition in favour of the Petitioner Nos.1 and 2. Smt. Koppisetti Parvati Devihas filed a criminal petition for enlargement of the Accused Nos.1 and 2 vide Crl.P.No.8668 of 2026. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to not-press the relief in favour of Accused Nos. 1 and 2.

Mr.Kadiyam Neelakanteswara Rao, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that Petitioner No.3/Accused No.3 is innocent of the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated by the police. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of the family and, therefore, his incarceration would cause undue hardship to his dependents. He is law-abiding citizens. The Petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court while enlarging him on bail. Hence, it is urged to allow the Criminal Petition.

Per contra, Mr.A.Sai Rohith, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner, submitting that the investigation is still underway and several material witnesses remain to be examined. It is contended that if the Petitioner are released on bail at this stage, there is a strong likelihood that he may abscond, thereby hampering the ongoing investigation and evading the process of law and urged to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

On perusal of the record, the Petitioners are arraigned as Accused Nos.1 to 3 in this case. The Petitioners were arrested on 13.04.2026. They have been in judicial custody for the past 197 days. The prosecution alleges that the Petitioners were indulged in dealing with 24 kgs of ganja.

The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that an application was filed seeking for extension of the judicial custody of the petitioners beyond 180 days. Such application cannot be allowed when the petitioner is in the judicial custody beyond 180 days. That application would have been considered and allowed by the learned Trial Court before completion of 180 days. Charge sheet has not yet been filed. Criminal Petition against Accused Nos.1 and 2 is dismissed as withdrawn.

The Accused No.3 was arrested on 13.04.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 197 days. The prosecution alleges that the Petitioners were indulged in dealing with 24 kgs of ganja. There is one similar adverse antecedent reported against the Accused No.3.

The Petitioner No.3 is permanent resident Polavaram District. He has got fixed abode. If the Petitioner No.3 is enlarged on bail subject to stringent conditions, there is no likelihood of his absconding, threatening the witnesses, tampering with the evidence or hampering the further course of investigation.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against Petitioner No.3/Accused No.3, this Court is inclined to enlarge Petitioner No.3/Accused No.3 on bail, subject to certain stringent conditions. Hence, the Criminal Petition, insofar as Petitioner No.3/Accused No.3 is concerned, is allowed.

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