K. Krishnaiahgoud, v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3161 OF 2026 DATE :25.03.2026 Between :

K.Krishnaiah Goud & another ...

Petitioners/A.5 & A.8 And The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad, Through P.S.Hyderabad Narcotics (TGANB) ... Respondent : ORDER :

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023 praying this Court to enlarge the petitioners on bail who are arrayed as accused Nos.5 and 8 in Crime No.9 of 2025 of Hyderabad Narcotics Police Station, TG Anti-Narcotics Bureau. The offences alleged

against the petitioner are under Sections 8(c), 22(c), 27A and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'NDPS Act').

2.

The brief facts of the case are that on receiving credible information that one Jaya Prakash Goud (A.1) was running an illegal Alprazolam manufacturing unit on the first floor of the Medha School premises bearing H.No.8-5-226/1, Syndicate Bank Colony, Old Bowenpally, Hyderabad, and was supplying the manufactured Alprazolam to toddy depots, the complainant along with his team reached the spot and confirmed the presence of the suspect, the team conducted a raid at about 4:00 p.m., on 13.09.2025 in the first-floor hall of the school building. A.1 was found present, and laboratory equipment, chemicals, and plastic containers resembling a drug manufacturing setup were noticed.

During enquiry, the accused allegedly confessed that he had been manufacturing Alprazolam in the premises for the past several months and supplying it to toddy depots and other persons in Telangana. Pursuant to his confession, the police seized finished Alprazolam weighing about 3.302 kg, semi-finished substances of different stages, large quantities of precursor chemicals, laboratory apparatus used for manufacturing the drug, cash of Rs.

sale proceeds, and two mobile phones in the presence of mediators. Hence a case was registered against the accused for the above offences.

3.

Heard Sri P.Vishnuvardhana Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have been falsely implicated solely based on coerced and inadmissible confessional statements, without any recovery of contraband from their possession, as only their mobile phones were seized. It is contended that there is no "live link" between the petitioners and the alleged contraband seized from another accused, and the prosecution relied on neutral financial transactions and inadmissible statements, which cannot establish criminal liability in view of the law laid down in Tofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu1. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents, they are law-abiding citizens, and their custodial interrogation is unnecessary as the investigation is based on material already in possession of police. It is further 1 (2020) 12 S.C.C.583

submitted that the provisions of Sections 8(c), 22(c), 27A, and 29 of the NDPS Act are not attracted in the absence of possession, financing, or conspiracy supported by evidence, and therefore the bar under Section 37 is not applicable. The petitioners have been in custody since 18.10.2025, and their continued detention violates their right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, especially when there is no possibility of tampering with evidence, and they are willing to cooperate with the investigation. Hence prayed this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioners by allowing this criminal petition.

5.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail contending that the petitioner No.1-A.5, was operating toddy shops and procuring Alprazolam from A.1, who is engaged in its illicit manufacture, while petitioner No.2- A.8, his son, played a key financial role by handling digital transactions related to drug purchases and payments. It is submitted that analysis of PhonePe and bank records reveals direct money transfers between A.8 and various toddy shop owners, establishing their involvement in the illegal trade, and that several other accused were regularly procuring Alprazolam through A.5, thereby forming part of a larger drug syndicate. It is further contended

that if petitioners are released on bail, they may influence or intimidate witnesses, tamper with evidence, destroy digital or physical records, or assist absconding accused, and therefore they are not entitled to bail. As such, petitioners are not entitled to bail and prayed to dismiss this petition.

6.

Considering the submissions made by both the counsel and the material on record, the petitioners are remanded to judicial custody on 17.10.2025 and the prime accused A.1 was granted mandatory bail. Considering the allegations against the petitioners and their period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioners subject to following conditions :

i. The petitioners shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Excise Cases, Hyderabad.

ii. The petitioners shall appear before the concerned SHO between 09.00 a.m and 5.00 p.m., on every Wednesday for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii. The petitioners shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of the BNSS.

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 25.03.2026 Rds

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.3161 OF 2026 Date: 25.03.2026 Rds