Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Taramareddy Srinivasa Rao, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 4 February, 2021
Bench: Lalitha Kanneganti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY, £t
: PRESENT : "
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANT].
MY
CRL.P.No. 394 0f 2021 4 '
Between:-
Taramareddy Srinivasa Rao, S/o. Venkanna.
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh, At Amaravati
Leese Respondent/Complainant.
Petition filed under Sections 437 & 439 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the
circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,
the High Court may be pleased to release the petitioners on bail in
Cr.No.300 of 2020 of Pamarru Police Station, Krishna District on the file of
Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for Trial of Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act-case at Krishna District,
Machilipatnam.
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the memorandum of
grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of
Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, Advocate for the Petitioner and of the
Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent/State, the Court made the
following
ORDER :-
HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
Criminal Petition No.394 of 2021
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 437 and 439
of Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'} to
grant regular bail to the petitioner/A-4 in connection with Crime
No.300 of 2020 of the Pamarru Police Station, Krishna District
for the offences punishable under Sections 269, 270, 273, 328
r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC), Section 5(1)
and 22 of Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 (For
short COTP Act) and Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS Act").
2. The case of prosecution is that on 25.12.2020 at about
14-00 hours at the outskirts of Addada village in Pamarru-
Gudivada road, Pamarru Mandal, the police found two persons
and on seeing the police, they tried to skulk away, but the police
caught hold of the petitioner/A.4 and he confessed that on the
instructions of his owner-A.3, he received banned gutka/
khainies and Ganja to A.2 and on verification, they found 40
bundles of tobacco products i.e. gutkha and khainee and 2kgs
of Ganja and the police seized the same under the cover of
mediator's report and the police arrested the petitioner and
remanded to judicial custody. Basing on the same, the present
crime is registered.
3. Heard Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, learned counsel
for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent-State.
2 | LK, J
iCRLP.No.394 of 2021
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/A-4 submits that
transportation of tobacco products is not an offence and the
police cannot register the offences under IPC except under Food
Safety and Standards Act, 2006. He also submits that in
Crl.P.Nos.3718 of 2018 and 5103 of 2019 and batch, this Court
has already laid down the ratio and basing on the same, several
orders were passed by this Court. He also submits that even
assuming that the petitioner has committed the offence under
NDPS Act, the quantity that is seized by the police is only 2 KGs
which is not a commercial quantity, as such, there is no bar
under Section 37 of the NDPS Act to grant bail to the petitioner.
He submits that the bail petition which was moved before the
Court below was dismissed in Cri. M.P.No.346 of 2020 even
without considering the scope of Section 37 of the NDPS Act and
apart from that, learned counsel also raised other grounds
stating that the police failed to follow the procedure
contemplated under NDPS Act while drawing the samples. He
also submits that the police cannot straight away take the
samples under the NDPS Act. As per the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court, they must produce the entire ganja before
the Magistrate and the Magistrate must see and give a certificate
of samples. Before the Magistrate only, the police can take
samples under the certificate issued by the Magistrate and
further submits that this Court in Crl.P.No.2231 of 2020 vide
order dated 10.07.2020 and in Crl.P.No.175 of 2021 vide order
dated 18.01.2021 has granted bail to the petitioners therein.
3 LK, J
CRLP.No.394 of 2021
5. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that transportation
of tobacco products is banned in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
6. In reply learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as
per the Circular No.13/SO0/2019 dated 15.08.2019 police
cannot register a case for transportation of tobacco products.
7. Admittedly, as per the said circular there is no prohibition
for transportation of tobacco. As far as the offence under NDPS
Act is concerned, the contraband that is seized from the
petitioner is only 2 KGs which is not a commercial quantity and
there is no bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act to grant bail to
the petitioner. However, as there is nothing on record to show
that the petitioner is a habitual offender, this Court deems it
appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The
petitioner/A-4 shall be enlarged on bail on his executing
personal bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with
two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the
learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gudiwada,
Krishna District.
Sd/-T.Madhavi
/ [TRUE COPY// De REGISTRAR
for SECTIO
FFICER
{The | Additional District and Sessions Judge-Special Judge for Trial of
Cases, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. . --
rrhe Pe onal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gudiwada, Krishna District
3.The Station House Officer, Pamarru Police Station, Kris re is strict
4,The Superintendent, Central Prison, Rajahmundry, East ° ar OUT)
5. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., ee
6.One CC to Sri Kakumanu Joji Amrutha Raju, Advocate(OPUC)
7.One spare copy.
TKK
HIGH COURT
LK.J
DT.04-02-2021.
BAIL ORDER
CRL.P.No. 394 of 2021
RELEASE THE PETITIONER
ON BAIL
