Telangana High Court
CRLP/8079/2026 of Sabar Israel Vs The State of Telangana, on 4 June 2026
INTHEHIGHcoURTFoRTHESTATEoFTELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HU$IOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO Between Sabar lsrael, S/o [\Iangala Savar, Age. 20 Years, Occ' Centering, R/o Bhurujoli' Goppili Rampa, Gajapati District,
\
INTHEHIGHcoURTFoRTHESTATEoFTELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HU$IOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
Between
Sabar lsrael, S/o [\Iangala Savar, Age. 20 Years, Occ' Centering, R/o Bhurujoli'
Goppili Rampa, Gajapati District, Orissa'
...PetitionerlAccused 3
AND
The State of Telangana, Represented by the Public Prosecutor' High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad'
lnvestigatingy officer, Frohibition and Excise Station, Dhoolpe|Hyderabad Petition under Section 480 & 483 of BNSS T";r;;H:;"#:l stated in the [Vlemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition, the High court may be pleased to Alli,1 .iie criminal Petition in connection with crime No'9 of 2026 under Sections 8(c) riw ibtOliiilt.l of the Act, 1985 NDPS Act, 1985 registered by the prohibition and excis"' ,iition Dhoorfei to rerease the petitioner on bail on his executing a personal bond for such sum as this Court deems fit and proper'
ThisPetititii':.,{}r-ilil'lgonforhearing,uponperusingtheMemorandumofGrounds of Criminal Petition ind upon heaiing'the arguments of Sri Mandeep Pamaar Angoth, Advocate for the Petitioner aid learnet ndditional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the ResPondents.
The Court marJ* tthe following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. CHALAPATHI RAO
DATE: 04.06.2026
BETWEEN:
Sabar Israel
. . ...Petitioner/A.3
And
The State of Telangana,
Rep by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court at Hyderabad and another
Respondents/C omp I ainant
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 is filed praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.3 in COR.No.09 of 2026 before the Prohibition and Excise Police Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 2O(b)(iixc) of NDPS Act, i985.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.01.2026 at 12:45 PM, the Prohibition and Excise Station, Dhoolpet conducted a ride in H.No: 13-
23671N126, Rahimpura, Shivlal Nagar, Asifiragar, Hyderabad and found two white polyhene bags at a corner and when the said bags were opened, in one bag the police allegedly found Dry Leaves, seeds and flower toppings weighted up to 13.61 Kgs marked as Pl. It is further alleged that the second polythene bag contained plant-based material Flower tops and fruit seeds and in ali, the materiai ranged up to 30.15 Kgs of dry ganja. The said contraband was seized and confessional statements of Accused Nos.l to 5 were recorded and remanded to judicial custody, declaring Accused Nos.6 to 12 as absconding.
3. Heard Sri Mandeep Pamaar Angoth, leamed counsel for petitioner, and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State,
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner/A.3 is innocent of the said aliegations and is the sole breadwinner of his family and has been languishing in judicial custody from 31.01 .2026. It is further averred that the petitioner is not involved in the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Hence, he prayed the Court to grantbail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.
5. On the other hand, Iearned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions rrade by the learned ccunsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was implicated in the crime for his alleged active involvement in the possession of contraband. It is further submitted that total 30.15 Kgs of Dry Ganja along with Six (6) Mobile Phones and Three (3) Two Wheeler's were seized from the possession of A.l to A.5, which is the commercial quantity and the involvement of other accused is also under investigation, who are still absconding. As such, at this stage. he is not entitle for bail. Therefore, 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, though the contention of learned counsel fbr petitiorrer is that the case against the petitioner is false and fictitious, the leamed Additional Public Prosecutor opposes the petition, citing that the seized contraband is huge cornmercial quantity'.
7. That being so, at this stage, it is pertinent to note that Section 37 of the NDPS Act, mandates 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 allegations against the petitioner, this Court is not satisfied that twin conditions for grantirrg bail under Section 37 are met. 'l'hat apart, it is pertinent to note that the seized contraband is 30. I 5 kgs of dry ganja, which is commercial quantity
8' In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and in view of the gravity of the offence along with the serious allegations leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Thus, this criminal Petition is devoid of merit and is liabre to be dismissed. .,.$ccordingly, this Crirninal petition is dismissed However the petitioner is at liberty to renew the application after a while. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/- B.REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII OFFICER
1. The I Aiid tional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
2. The Supe:iriterrdent, Central Prison, Hyderabad
3. Station House Officer, Prohibition and Excise Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad
4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad lourl
5. One CC tl Sri. Mandeep Pamaar Angoth, Advocate [OPUC]
6. Two CD C.t;pies GNK'KA
To, M
HIGH COURT .r. 1r{E STAT€ DeSP DATED: o.r;*i06/2026 ,t ))'J *
ORDER
CRLP.No.uu79 of 2026 DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION /t"" rB JuNts z
.b * t C\ b 1,b