Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/3838/2026 of Vadana Sandeep Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 3 May 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3838/2026 Between: 1. VADANA SANDEEP, S/O. VADANA RAVI,R/O. HARINADHA PURAM,
APHC010244252026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
1. VADANA SANDEEP, S/O. VADANA RAVI,R/O. HARINADHA PURAM, UT STREET,NELLORE, NELLORE DISTRICT
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THROUGH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER,VEDAYAPALEM POLICE STATION,NELLORE CITYREP.
BY
ITS
PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,HIGH
COURT
OF
ANDHRA
PRADESH,AT AMARAVATHI.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT
Petition under Section 437/438/439/482 of Cr.P.C and 528 of BNSS
praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court pleased to direct the Respondent to release the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 71/2026 on the file of the Vedayapalem Police Station, Nellore, Nellore District in the interest of justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. P NAGENDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant:
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
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.
ORDER :
The Criminal Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) by the Petitioner/Accused No.4, for granting of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.71 of 2026, on the file of Vedayapalem Urban Police Station, Kakinada District, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
2. Heard Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 05.03.2026 at about 18:30 hours, the police received information about illegal possession of prohibited ganja for commercial sale near Sri Lanka Colony, Nellore Rural Mandal. The Inspector of Police, Vedayapalem Police Station, along with staff and mediators, proceeded to the spot and apprehended Accused Nos.1 to 3, who were found in an Ape Auto bearing No. AP-27-UB-3460. During the search, ganja weighing about 2.396 kgs, valued at Rs. 23,960/-, was seized. On enquiry, Accused Nos.1 to 3 stated that they had procured the ganja from the petitioner/Accused No.4. The accused were arrested, and the contraband along with the vehicle was seized under a mahazarnama in the presence of mediators and Tahsildar. A case was thereafter registered and investigation was taken up.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the present case is foisted against the petitioner/A4 on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused and that no contraband was seized from his possession, as the alleged ganja was seized only from Accused Nos.1 to 3. It is further submitted that the petitioner/A4 is in no way concerned with the crime and the contraband involved in the present crime is only 2.396 Kgs of ganja, which is a non commercial quantity. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the Court and undertakes to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioner/A4 is habitually transporting ganja with the help of Accused Nos.1 to 3 for clandestine sale to the innocent public to gain wrongful profits. It is further submitted that the petitioner/A4 is the main supplier of ganja, is absconding since the date of offence, and that the investigation is at a crucial stage. If the petitioner/A4 is granted anticipatory bail, there is every likelihood of tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and committing similar offences. Hence, she prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, the allegation against the petitioner/A4 is that he is the supplier of ganja to Accused Nos.1 to 3 and is involved in illegal transportation for sale. Since the investigation is still in progress and the seized contraband is yet to be analyzed, and having regard to the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________________
DR.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 04.05.2026. UPS
Date: 04.05.2026
UPS