THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.5414 OF 2021
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") seeking pre-arrest
bail to the petitioner/A3 in the event of his arrest in connection
with Crime No. 163 of 2021 of Special Enforcement Bureau
Station, Yerragondapalem, Prakasam District registered for the
offences punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 22(c) of the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity "NDPS
Act").
2. The case of prosecution is that on 02.07.2021 at about
12:30 P.M. the officials of Special Enforcement Bureau,
Yerragondapalem, Prakasam District conducted raid in the shed
constructed in agricultural land belonging to the petitioner and
found certain raw material meant for manufacture of drug and to
adulterate the toddy with diazepam. The said material was seized
and basing on the confession of A1 who was present there, the
petitioner is arrayed as A3 in the present crime.
3. Heard Sri G.Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only allegation against petitioner is that watchman of the premises has 2 confessed before Police that A1 used to take the help of petitioner for preparation of contraband. He submits that only basing on the confession of co-accused, the petitioner has been implicated in this case, which is contrary to law and the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu1 wherein it was held that confession before Police Officer in NDPS cases is hit by Section 25 of Indian Evidence Act, hence inadmissible and there cannot be any conviction. He submits that initially a crime was registered in the State of Telangana for the very same offence in which neither the watchman nor the petitioner was shown as accused, but subsequently basing on said crime, when Police of Andhra Pradesh State have visited the site they found certain material lying there and only basing on the confession of the watchman, petitioner is implicated as an accused. He further submits that there is nothing to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and nothing has been seized from his possession. He submits that while granting bail, the Court has to take into consideration as to whether there is prima facie or reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed offence, nature and gravity of the accusation, the likelihood of absconding, tampering with the evidence and hampering with investigation process. He submits that except the statement of the watchman even the investigation done so far does not reveal the involvement of the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner is a 1 2021 SCC Online SC 882 (crl.A.152 of 2013) 3 farmer and he has been falsely implicated in this crime. Hence, the petitioner's case may be considered for grant of pre-arrest bail.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that it is fact that initially crime was registered in the State of Telangana and as premises is situated in a village of Andhra Pradesh, Police visited the place and watchman of the premises has confessed that A1 used to take the help of petitioner for preparation of contraband. He submits that investigation is pending. However, he does not deny the fact that in the investigation so far done, nothing has been put forth to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. He submits that they have to collect further information such as call data records and other material from Hyderabad to find out the involvement of the petitioner. Hence, he opposed the bail petition.
6. Heard both sides and perused the material on record. As per the arguments advanced by both the parties, now the fact remains is that so far there is no material to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence except the confession made by watchman of the premises i.e. co-accused. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/A3 shall be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 163 of 2021 of Special Enforcement 4 Bureau Station, Yerragondapalem, Prakasam District on condition of executing self bond for Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties for a likesum each to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, Special Enforcement Bureau Station, Yerragondapalem, Prakasam District. However, during the course of investigation, if any material is found against the petitioner, which connects him with the alleged crime, Prosecution is at liberty to file appropriate application seeking cancellation of bail.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J Date :08.10.2021 IKN 5 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI allowed CRIMINAL PETITION No.5414 of 2021 08.10.2021r IKN