Telangana High Court
Meka Vamshi Krishna vs The State Of Telangana on 8 January, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16231 of 2024
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS')
for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, who is arrayed as
accused No.9 in Crime No.133 of 2024 of Shayampet Police
Station, Hyderabad.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.09.2024, Sub-
Inspector Ch. Pravod Kumar received information that six
individuals were possessing and distributing ganja, a banned
substance, at Pedagutta, outskirts of Pathipaka village. A
team led by the Sub-Inspector apprehended the six
individuals, who confessed to purchasing and selling ganja.
The said team seized 2.045 kg of dry ganja worth Rs.51,125/-
and several mobile phones used in the commission of the
offense. The entire procedure was documented, and the seized
items were handed over to the police station for safe custody.
The six accused individuals were taken into custody, and a
case was registered against them.
SKS,J
3. Heard Sri K. R. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Syed Yasar Mamoon,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of
the respondent - State.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in the case and
that the Police relied on a coerced confessional statement from
a co-accused. He further submitted that the allegations in the
FIR do not constitute a prima facie offence against the
petitioner and that the confession of the co-accused is
inadmissible as evidence, as per the Judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu 1.
Therefore, he prayed the Court to grant pre-arrest bail to the
petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner stating that the petitioner is drug peddlers. He
further submitted that the investigation is in progress and if
the petitioner is released on bail, at this stage, he may tamper
MANU/SC/0797/2020
SKS,J
with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he
prayed the Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
6. Having regard to the rival submissions made and on
going through the material placed on record, it is noted that
the limited grievance of learned counsel for the petitioner is
that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case solely
basing on the confession made by co-accused in whose
possession contraband was seized and that petitioner is no
way concerned with the offence punishable under Sections 8
(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, as no contraband was
seized from his possession, whereas, it is the specific stand of
learned Additional Public Prosecutor that petitioner is actively
involved with other accused in his illegal activities.
7. At this stage, it is pertinent to observe that the Courts
exercise caution while dealing with anticipatory bail petitions
in NDPS cases due to the serious nature of these offences.
Granting anticipatory bail in regular manner may hamper the
investigation, allow the accused to abscond, and undermine
public interest in preventing and controlling these offences.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that
anticipatory bail should not be granted in NDPS cases as a
SKS,J
matter of routine, as the same may hamper the investigation
and enable the accused to destroy evidence. Further, in the
case of Anarul SK v. State of West Bengal 2 the Hon'ble
Supreme Court observed that grant of anticipatory bail in
cases involving NDPS is a very serious issue.
9. In light of the above discussion, this Court is of the
opinion that the grant of pre-arrest bail at a stage when the
investigation is still in progress, may impede the investigative
process and potentially prejudice the case of the prosecution,
as such, there are no merits in this criminal petition to grant
pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and the same is liable to be
dismissed.
10. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
_______________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 08.01.2025
SAI
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)No.12621/2024 dated 19.09.2024
SKS,J
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16231 of 2024
Date: 08.01.2025
SAI
