Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Angadi Chandra Babu vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 14 December, 2022
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9535 of 2022
ORDER:-
The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.5 in Crime No.178
of 2022 on the file of the Chirala I Town Police Station, Bapatla
District for the offences under Sections 8(C) r/w 20 (B) of the
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
2. The petitioner has filed the present Criminal Petition seeking
to quash the said complaint on the ground that he has been
included as an accused in the complaint, solely on the basis of a
confession said to have been made by the 4th Accused and the
same is not sufficient to include him as an accused.
3. Sri Naga Praveen Vankayalapati, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner submits that the complaint had been
registered on 11.05.2022 and no material has been elicited from
any source, regarding the complicity of the petitioner in this
crime. He would submit that the confession of a co-accused is not
sufficient, in any manner to include the petitioner as an accused
or to conduct an investigation against the accused. He would
further submit that as the ganja seized from the 1st accused was
only150 grams, the petitioner would be entitled for a notice under
Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. and relies upon the judgment of the
learned Single Judge of this Court in K. Ranjith Vs. State of
Andhra Pradesh1.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that investigation is
still at the initial stage and time may be needed to elicit further
information and material to demonstrate the complicity of the
petitioner in this crime.
5. He further submits that as the petitioner has been accused
in various provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic
Substances Act, 1985, he would not be entitled for benefit of
notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. and the Investigating Officer
would be at liberty to arrest the petitioner for the purpose of
custodial interrogation or otherwise.
6. While, it is true that mere confession of a co-accused can
never be the basis for conviction of a person, the fact remains that
the case is presently at the stage of investigation and the
Investigating Officer would have to be given the leeway of
conducting further investigation to ascertain whether the facts
2021 (3) ALT(Cri) 281
stated in the confession are true and are corroborated by other
material.
7. In the circumstances, this Court does not deem it
appropriate to interfere in the investigation at this stage and
accordingly this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
8. In view of the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this
Court, mentioned above, which is binding on this Court, the
petitioner shall be given the benefit of notice under Section 41-A
of Cr.P.C. before any further steps are taken against him.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending if any,
shall stand closed.
__________________________________
JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
Date: 14.12.2022
MJA
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9535 of 2022
14.12.2022
MJA
