Telangana High Court
Anand Ashok Adhagale, vs The Union Of India, on 24 November, 2025
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.14423 OF 2025
ORDER:
This criminal petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by
the petitioner/A.1 seeking enlargement on bail in connection
with Cr.NCB.F.No.48/1/1/2024/NCB/HZU of Kukatpally Police
Station, Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioner
are under Section 8(c) r/w.20(b)(ii)(C), 27A, 28 and 29 of
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for
short 'NDPS Act').
2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant who
is the Inspector, Narcotics Control Bureau, Hyderabad Zone,
filed a complaint stating that on 11.04.2024 on receiving
specific information that one person from Maharashtra is
trafficking a substantial quantity of Ganja to Maharashtra via
Warangal-Hyderabad route in Ashok Leyland truck bearing
No.MH 16 CD 6006, started checking the vehicle movements
before entering the Ghatkesar Toll Plaza coming from Warangal
route. At about 1700 hours, they noticed the said vehicle and
the same was intercepted and on enquiry he revealed his name
SKS,J
as Anand Ashok Adhaqale who is the petitioner herein and the
NCB team informed him about their interception and when he
was informed about vehicle search, he declined. On enquiry
about ganja trafficking he revealed that he is transporting more
than 300 packets kept in 25 gunny bags which are concealed
under consignment of 400 bags of Aluminium Chloride
Chemical Powder and recovered 334 packets and each of them
were tightly wrapped with brown color adhesive tapes and each
of the packet approximately weighed 2 kgs. The said packets
contain dark brown color suspected material with pungent
smell and appeared as flowering and fruiting tops of a plant.
On enquiry, the petitioner replied that it is Ganja totaling to
721.42 kgs. Hence, a complaint was registered against the
accused for the above offences.
3. Heard Sri Porika Vikas Raj, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri Naraparaju Aveenesh, learned Standing
Counsel appearing for the respondent.
4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that
petitioner is only a driver of the Ashok Leyland Truck and he
had no knowledge of the contraband concealed beneath the
consignment of Aluminium Chloride bags. The confession
statement recorded under Section 67 of NDPS Act is
SKS,J
inadmissible in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Tofan Singh Vs State of Tamilnadu 1 , the alleged
search and seizure is vitiated for non-compliance of mandatory
provisions of Sections 42 and 50 of NDPS Act. He further
submitted that the petitioner was in judicial custody since
12.04.2024, causing undue hardship to his family, that
investigation is completed and charge sheet filed, therefore,
there is no question of tampering with the evidence and there is
no chance of conclusion of trial in the near future. He also
submitted that as per the judgment of the Apex Court in
Satender Kumar Antil v.CBI 2 the accused cannot be kept in
jail in the case of prolonged period of trial. He also submitted
that the petitioner is taking care of his small children and his
aged mother and that their house is also damaged in the recent
rains and prayed the Court to allow the Criminal Petition by
granting regular bail to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel opposed
the bail, stating that huge commercial quantity was seized from
the petitioner. If the petitioner is released on bail, he may
abscond and commit similar offences. There are no reasonable
1 (2021) 4 SCC 1
2 (2022) 10 SCC 51
SKS,J
grounds in this case to conclude that the petitioner is not guilty
of the offence. The investigation is under Section 37 of the NDPS
Act. He also submitted that petitioner cannot be released merely
on the ground of delay and Section 436-A of the Cr.P.C., is not
applicable in this case as it is only one of the mechanisms
under law and not an absolute ground for release. In the instant
case, the seized contraband is a commercial quantity and he is
in jail for not less than five years, thus, he cannot be released
on bail according to Section 436-A of the Cr.P.C. 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
previously the petitioner had filed Crl.P.Nos.11138 and 12121 of
2025 before this Court, seeking the relief of grant of regular bail
and the same was dismissed vide order dated 15.09.2025 and
09.10.2025 observing that 'Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates
that offences involving commercial quantities be non-bailable,
requiring reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty
and unlikely to commit further offences while on bail. Given the
serious set of allegations against the petitioner, this Court is not
satisfied that conditions for granting bail under Section 37 are
met'. However, it is noticed that there are no changed
SKS,J
circumstances back then in the earlier regular bail petition, and
the present bail petition. Further, as seen from the record, the
investigation was completed and charge sheet was also filed.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of directing
the trial Court to conclude the trial, as expeditiously as
possible, in accordance with law.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
________________
K. SUJANA, J
Date: 24.11.2025
SAI
SKS,J
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.14423 of 2025
Date: 24.11.2025
SAI
