Telangana High Court
CRLP/12437/2015 of Bachu Venkatesh, Vs The Directorate of REvenue Intelligence, on 30 December 2015
SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12437 OF 2015 ORDER: This criminal petition under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by the petitioner/ A .3 seeking bail in crime F.No.DRI/HZU/48D/ENQ-6(INT-NIL) 2015 on the file of Directorate of Revenue
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Arguments
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
CRIMINAL PETITION No.12437 OF 2015
ORDER:
This criminal petition under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure is filed by the petitioner/A.3 seeking bail in crimeF.No.DRI/HZU/48D/ENQ-6(INT-NIL) 2015 on the file of Directorate ofRevenue Intelligence, Zonal Unit, Hyderabad registered for the offencesunder Sections 22,25,28 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985.
The case of the prosecution is that on 28.7.2015 when the revenueofficials surprised M/s.Nekkantis Labs, they found A.1, incharge of thefactory and A.2, who was attending the work and on inspection, they found48 steel trays filled with Alprazolam. While the inspection was going on,petitioner-A.3 entered into the premises with cash of Rs.3,97,500/- and onenquiry, he confessed to have come there to purchase Alprazolam. Thetotal quantity of contraband was found to be 121.29 kgs worth ofRs.24,25,800/-.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even as per the caseof the prosecution, the petitioner was not found in possession ofcontraband-Alprazolam and mere possession of cash would not attract anoffence under the Act. It is further submitted that the petitioner is sufferingwith ailment of partial paralytic and he needs regular check up by neurospecialist. The petitioner was arrested on 29.7.2015 and remanded tojudicial custody on 30.7.2015 and since then he is in judicial custody. Hence, he prays this Court to grant bail to the petitioner herein.
On the other hand, the learned special Public Prosecutor opposedthe petition contending that the petitioner went to the factory for purchasingof Alprazolam with case which was seized and therefore, he squarely fallswithin the provision of Section 37 of NDPS Act and hence, it is not a fit caseto grant bail to the petitioner.
Heard and perused the records.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that thealleged confession made by the petitioner is highly improbable and furtherthe said amount of Rs.3,97,500/- was not recovered from the petitioner asalleged by the prosecution. Further it is the case of the petitioner that thesaid amount was recovered from the house of the petitioner.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that not only theconfession of A.3 but the other persons also confessed regarding the factthat the petitioner has earlier purchased Alprazolam from A.1 and A.2.
After hearing both sides and on perusal of the material on record, thisCourt is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
_____________________
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO