Dobbali Ravinder Goud 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.4642 of 2026 DATE: 13.04.2026 BETWEEN:

Dobbali Ravinder Goud .....petitioner/accused No.10 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023 praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.10 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.21,40,000/- alleged to be 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 M.Naveen Kumar Goud, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is no way connected with the alleged offence. Petitioner was arrested basing on the confession of coaccused, which is in admissible in evidence, there is no corroborative evidence against the petitioner and that no contraband was seized from the possession of petitioner. The only material that links the petitioner to financial transactions to an illegal act is the inadmissible confessional statement of co-accused and there is no material to show that these transactions are consideration for the supply of Alprazolam. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since 04.12.2025.

Hence, prayed this Court to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed bail contending that the investigation revealed that the petitioner/accused A-10, who is running toddy shops, had been purchasing Alprazolam from the prime accused A-1, who was engaged in its illegal manufacture and that during the raid the police seized 3.302 kg of Alprazolam along with different stages of the manufactured substance, large quantities of precursor chemicals, manufacturing apparatus which is a commercial quantity, thereby attracting the stringent provisions of Sections 22(c), 27A and 29 of the NDPS Act and the embargo under Section 37 of the Act.

Though no contraband was recovered directly from the petitioner, the confessional statements of co-accused and the UPI financial transactions between the accused persons prima facie established the petitioner's role in the illegal drug trade as a purchaser/financier in the conspiracy.

a risk of tampering with witnesses and influencing other absconding accused. He also contended that the absence of criminal antecedents, personal circumstances, or the period of custody could not override the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, prayed to dismiss this criminal petition.

6.

In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner is in jail since 04.12.2026. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 26 witnesses have been examined.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the incarceration period of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: i.

The petitioner 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, Manoranjani Complex, Hyderabad.

ii.

The petitioner shall appear before the concerned SHO at 11:00 a.m., on every Monday for a period of eight (8) week or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.

iii.

The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.(presently, Section 480(3) of the BNSS).

7.

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

_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 13.04.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4642 of 2026 Date: 13.04.2026 SAI