G. Kasinath Goud v. The State Of Telangana

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI CRIMINAL PETITION No.2155 OF 2024 O R D E R:

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in Crime No.386 of 2023 on the file of Chatrinaka Police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 37-A of the Telangana Excise Act (for short 'TSE Act'), which was altered to Section 8(c) read with 22(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act').

2.

The case of the prosecution, in brief, was that on 02.11.2023 at 19:00 hours, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Chatrinaka Police Station, Hyderabad, lodged a report stating that on receiving credible information that adulterated toddy was being sold in a Toddy shop at GM Chowni Dikalgate, Chatrinaka, Hyderabad, he along with his staff and panch witnesses went to the said toddy shop and found a person selling the toddy and another person available in the shop. On enquiry, they revealed their names as B. Sagar, worker in the shop and another B. Narsimha, owner of the shop. On search, the police found big plastic drums, which were filled with toddy, one small can and beer bottles containing toddy, seized the same and collected samples of toddy in six plastic bottles from three plastic drums, in the presence of panchas.

3.

Basing on the said report, the subject crime was registered and the seized material was sent to the chemical examiner. The chemical examiner issued a report stating that Alprazolam substance was found in the seized items. Therefore, the section of law was altered from Section 37-A of TSE Act to Section 8(c) read with 22 (c) of the NDPS Act.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent-State. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was the license holder of the said Toddy compound, he never involved in mixing the contraband in toddy and the police were trying to implicate him in a false case. Though the petitioner was not shown as accused in the above Crime, he was apprehending arrest since the police officials are frequently visiting his residence to arrest him. In support of his submissions, learned counsel relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and others v. State of Punjab1 and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in K.Dayanand Rao and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh2. 6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the police had conducted raid in violation of Rules 3 and 27 of the 1 1980 2 SCC 565 2 1992(3) ALT 21

Telangana State Excise Rules. Without knowing the quantity of intoxicant, it could not be said that the petitioner committed the offence under Section 8(c) read with 22(c) of NDPS Act. When the quantity of intoxicant was not mentioned, it would only come under Section 8(c) read with 22(a) of NDPS Act and the punishment prescribed for the said offence was only one year imprisonment.

7.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8.

Perused the record.

9.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and the aforesaid Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, wherein it was made clear that filing of first information report was not a condition precedent for exercise of power under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., and as the petitioner is apprehending his arrest since it was alleged that the police officials are frequently visiting his residence to arrest him, it is considered fit that the protection under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. can be extended to the petitioner, though his name was not shown in the F.I.R. Also considering merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that without knowing the quantity of intoxicant, the offence under Section 8(c) read with 22(c) of NDPS Act would not attract, but

would only attract the offence under Section 22(a) of NDPS Act, it is considered fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 10.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail subject to the following conditions:

1) The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Station House Officer, Chatrinaka Police Station, Hyderabad, within a period of 15 days from the date of this order. On such surrender, the said Station House Officer shall release the petitioner on bail, on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Station House Officer.

2) The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C and shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer in investigating the case.

Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _________________ Dr. G.RADHA RANI, J Date: 28.02.2024 ssp