Mohammed Furkan v. The State Of Telangana
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: '173 0F 2021 Between:
Mohammed Furkan, S/o. Mohd. Ejaj, Aged about 37 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Moti Kunj, Lohamandi, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, India - 282002. ... PETITTONER/ACCUSEDNo.4 AND The State of Telangana, Through S.H.O., Police Station Bhadrachalam Town pSl Bhadradri Kothagudem District, Rep. through its Public prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the lt/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner iAccused No. 4 in the event of their arrest in connection with the FIR vide FlR. 373 of 2020 on the file of the police station Bhadrachalam Town.
This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the lVemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Srl M S ACHYUTH BHARTHWAJ ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1.
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIM AL PETITION No.173 OF 2021 ORDER:
This Criminal Petition, under Section 438 Cr'P.C., is filed by the petitioner/A-4, for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.373 of 2020 of P.S. Bhadrachalam Town, registered for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) r/w. Section 20(b) of N.D.P.S. Act. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, the leamed Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and is in no way concemed with the alleged offences ofpossessing ganja etc. It is submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and is prepared to abide by any condition that may be imposed in case of granting anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State opposed granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, stating that the vehicle belonging to the petitioner/A-4 is being used for transporting Ganja and that there are specific allegations against the petitioner that at the instance of the petitioner herein and the other accused i.e. A-5 in the crime, the alleged Ganja is being transported. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the petition'
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offences, this Court is not inclined to grant anticiparory bail ro the peritioner.
The Criminal petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the competent court within a period of ten days from today and applies for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the said Court, in accordance with law. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. Sd/-CH.VE N KATES HWARLU ASSISTANT BEGISTRAR , ll SECTION OFFICER To, //TRUE COPY//
1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate , at Bhadrachalam.
2. The station House officer, porice Station Bhadracharam Town psr Bhadradri Kothagudem District.
3. Two CCs to Public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]
4. One CC to SRt. M S ACHYUTH BHARTHWAJ Advocate tOpUCl
5. Two CD Gopies
HIGH COURT GSDJ DATED: 1910112021 TA 14:
e ol) $ N JA )
ORDER
( + c CRLP.No.173 of 202'l D1SMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION i 1) tJtT