CRLP/2998/2026 of Pangi Govind alias Govindu alias Kondala Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 15 April 2026

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the Petitioner herein/Accused No.3, seeking regular bail, in Crime No. 331 of 2024, on the file of the Pendurthi Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) r/w 8(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (for short “NDPS Act”).

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 05.07.2024, on receipt of credible information, the police proceeded to the area near the bridge at Pingadi Village, Pendurthi, and conducted vehicle checking. On reaching the spot, the police noticed two persons coming towards them, who, on seeing the police, attempted to flee. During the course of investigation, Accused Nos. 1 and 2 disclosed their address particulars, and based on their confessional statements, the police seized 20 kgs of Ganja under the cover of a mediator’s report. Accused No. 3 was subsequently arrested based on the confessional statement of the co-accused.

3. Heard Sri Gollapalli Maheswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing on behalf of the State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this crime and that he is in no way connected with the commission of the offence. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 26.11.2025. The contraband involved in the present crime is of 20 Kgs of Ganja, which is a non-commercial quantity. He would further submit that the petitioner has been arrayed as accused basing on the confession statement of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the statutory period is over and no report has been filed before the Trial Court till date. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners undertake to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the petition and contended that the investigation is still pending and the contraband involved in the present case is 20 Kgs of Ganja. She would further submit that no report was filed before the learned Special Court by the learned Public Prosecutor concerned seeking for extension period of judicial custody of the petitioner by indicating the progress of investigation and the specific reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the initial period.

6. Considering the submissions and upon keen perusal of the material placed on record and in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 26.11.2025, the fact that the contraband involved in the present crime is only 20 Kgs of Ganja, that the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.3 basing on the confession of the co- accused, that the statutory period is over and no report has been filed before the Special Court by the prosecution, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner/accused No.3 on bail with the following conditions; i. The petitioner/accused No.3, shall execute personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. ii. The petitioner/accused No.3, shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall cooperate with further investigation, if any. iii. The petitioner/accused No.3, shall not directly or indirectly tamper with evidence nor influence, intimidate, or induce any prosecution witness. iv. The petitioner/accused No.3, shall appear before the Station House Officer, concerned, once in a week i.e., on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. till filing of charge sheet. v. The petitioner/accused No.3, shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. vi. The petitioner/accused No.3, shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court. If they claim that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the concerned Court.

7. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

8. It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and they shall not be construed as opinion on the merits of the Crime.

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed.

As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

__________________________________________ DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 16.04.2026. UPS

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2998/2026

Dt.16.04.2026

UPS