Monday, 13, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Patil Amarnath vs The State Of Telangana
2024 Latest Caselaw 1332 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 1332 Tel
Judgement Date : 27 March, 2024

Telangana High Court

Patil Amarnath vs The State Of Telangana on 27 March, 2024

Author: G. Radha Rani

Bench: G. Radha Rani

          THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI
         CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.3411 and 3322 of 2024


COMMON ORDER:

These Criminal Petitions are filed by the petitioners /accused No.1

and 2 under Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in Crime No.915

of 2023 on the file of the Pet Basheerabad Police Station, Cyberabad, which

was numbered as C.C.No.860 of 2023 on the file of the learned First

Additional District Judge at Malkajgiri, registered for the offence under

Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic

Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act').

2. The case of the prosecution in brief was that on 23.10.2023 at 19:00

hours, the SI of Police of Pet Basheerabad Police Station on credible

information about some unknown persons transporting Ganja in a car

proceeded to Dhoolapally X roads along with his staff and clues team and

conducted vehicle checking. While conducting vehicle checking, they found

a Verna car bearing No.AP 36 R 3303, stopped the same and found accused

Nos.1 and 2 in the said car. On enquiry, it revealed that accused No.1

belonged to Karnataka, accused No.2 belonged to Chattisgarh and that the

car belonged to accused No.5. On checking the car, the SI found 82 kgs of

ganja packed in 41 bundles in the dicky of car. The SI conducted

Dr.GRR,J Crl.P. Nos.3411 & 3322 of 2024

panchanama and seized the contraband. Accused Nos.1 and 2 further

revealed that they procured the contraband from accused No.3, who

belonged to the State of Orissa and were proceeding to handover the

contraband to accused No.4 at Maharashtra. He produced the accused

Nos.1 and 2 before the Station House Officer. Basing on his report, the

above crime was registered.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 and the

learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the seizure of the

contraband was not done as per the mandatory provisions of NDPS Rules

2022. There were violations of Rules 3(2), 3(3), 3(4) and 3(5). As per the

panchanama, the contraband was transferred into two gunny bags and the

samples were not drawn before the Magistrate, the panch chits were pasted

on the gunny bags which would give scope for tampering. Sampling was

done against the Rules and not drawn from each bundle, and against the

guidelines given in several judgments by several constitutional Courts and

relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mangilal vs. The

State of Madhya Pradesh 1, the judgment of High Court of Delhi in Kashif

2023 LiveLaw (SC) 549

Dr.GRR,J Crl.P. Nos.3411 & 3322 of 2024

vs. Narcotics Control Bureau, dated 18.05.2023 and the judgment of this

Court in Baba Sow Chandekar vs. State of Telangana 2.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed

grant of bail to the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 stating that investigation

was completed, charge sheet was also filed and there was no procedural

violation in drawing the samples under Section 52-A of NDPS Act.

6. Perused the record.

7. On a perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

Mangilal's case (1 supra), the same was delivered while deciding the

Criminal Appeal and it was not at the stage of granting bail. This Court is of

the considered opinion that the procedural violations in drawing the samples

can be looked into only at the stage of trial, but not at the stage of granting

bail.

8. Considering that the investigation was completed and charge sheet

was also filed and the same was also taken on file and the matter was ripe

for trial and as the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 belonged to different

states and if they were released on bail at this stage, it might be difficult to

LAWS (TLNG) 2022 7 85

Dr.GRR,J Crl.P. Nos.3411 & 3322 of 2024

procure their presence for trial, it is considered not a fit case to grant bail to

petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 at this stage.

9. In the result, the Criminal Petitions are dismissed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

_____________________ Dr. G. RADHA RANI, J

Date: 27.03.2024 vsl

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Media

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter