Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/1805/2026 of Kandregula Jaya Vinay alias Vinay alias J Jaya Vinay Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 12 March 2026
■SS ^ INf IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV. ' a l iy '«: *4 ;•. <?•-> VV'^ ; ^f>. >s FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX iPRESENT: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1805 OF 2026 j
f
?#//
V
'»■
■SS
^ IN
f
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV.
'
a
l
iy
'«:
*4
;•
.
<?•->
VV'^
;
^f>.
>s
FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
iPRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1805 OF 2026
j
Between:
Kandregula Jaya Vinay @ Vinay @ J.Jaya Vinay, S/o Mahalaxmi Naidu Age 30 years, R/o D.No. 15-16-47, Near Post Office, Beside Sulabh Complex, PVP Naidu Street, Gavarapalem, Anakapalli District.
...Petitioner/Accused No.1
i
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati
...Respondent/Complainant
Petition under Section 480 and 483 of BNSS, is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition the High Court may be pleased to release the Petitioner/Accused. No.
bail in Crime No. 541 of 2025, on the file of the Muvvalavanipalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam.
on
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the grounds filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Dasari Ramakoteswar Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Public Prosecutor for Respondent, the Court made the following
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1805/2026
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:
This Criminal Petition, under Sections 480 and 483 of the BNSS, has been filed by the Petitioner herein/Accused No.1, seeking regular bail, in Crime No.541/2025 of Muvvalavanipalem Police Station, Visakhapatnam, registered for the offences punishable under Section 123 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”), Sections 20(b)(ii)(B), 22(b), 27(a), 25 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 31.12.2025, on reliable information about the illegal possession and transportation of ganja, the police while conducting vehicle checking, found the accused persons in possession of 5.5 Kgs of Ganja and 3.8 grams of MDMA. They arrested the accused and the contraband was seized under the cover of the mediators’ report.
3. Heard Sri Shaik Afzal Mohammed, learned counsel representing Sri Dasari Ramakoteswar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner/accu sed No.1 and Mrs.K.Priyanka Lakshmi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor 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 31.12.2025. The contraband involved in the present crime is 5.5 Kgs of
Ganja and 3.8 grams of MDMA, which is a non-commercial quantity. 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 petitioner undertakes to strictly adhere to any conditions that may be imposed by this Hon’ble 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 5.5 Kgs of Ganja and 3.8 grams of MDMA. She would further submit that no report was filed before the learned Court below 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 is in judicial custody since 31.12.2025, the fact that the contraband involved in the present crime is only 5.5 Kgs of Ganja and 3.8 grams of MDMA, that the statutory period is over and no report has been filed before the Court, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following conditions; i. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall execute a personal bond for a of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sum sureties for a like sum each, to the satisfaction of the learned IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall appear before the Investigating II. Officer as and \A/hen required and shall cooperate with further i investigation, if any. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall not directly or indirectly tamper with III. evidence nor influence, intimidate, or induce any prosecution witness. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall appear before the Station House IV. 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. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall not commit or indulge in commission V. of any offence in future. The petitioner/accused No.1 shall surrender his passport, if any, to the VI. concerned Court. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the concerned Court. In the event of violation of any of the above conditions, the prosecution
7. shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail. It is also made clear that the observations made in this order are only for
8. 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. SD/- l\/l.SPdI^SVAS assistant Rfc'iGSSTRAR SECTION OPFiCER
1. The Court of the IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Visakhapatnam.
2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Visakhapatnam.
3. The Station House Officer, Muvvalavanipalem Visakhapatnam.
4. One CC to Sri Dasari Ramakoteswar Rao, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP, Amaravati. [OUT]
6. One spare copy. //TRUE COPY// To, at Police Station PSD
HIGH COURT DR.VJP,J DATE:13/03/2026 BAIL ORDER CRLP.No.1805 of 2026 ALLOWED