J. Shankar Singh , Nala Shankar v. The State Of Telangana

e) Ag ,i lEJr I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD 9T a) { FRIDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JLINE TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN I :PRESENT:

THE HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 29ll OF 2019 Between:

J.Shankar Singh, @ Nala Shankar, S/o. Sheetal Singh Petitioner/Accused-2 -\\D The State of Telangana, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad. Respondent Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C, praying that in the circumstances stated in the petition and the grounds filed therein, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Station House Officer, PS Excise Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, to release the Petitioner/Accused No.2 on Bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.33412019 at P.S. Excise Dhootpet, Hyderabad; Counsel for the Petitioner SRI VIKRAN{ ITAGI Counsel for the Respondent ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER:

( HON'BLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.2911 of 2019 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner, who is A.2 in Crime No.334 o{ 2Ol9 of Excise Police Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8 (c), r/w. Section 20 (b)(ii)(A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevitl'"the NDPS Act"), seeking anticipatory bail. The case of the prosecution is that on 1 1.05.2019 at about 1 1.15 zi.m., the Prohibition and Excise officials received a credible information about illegal possession of dry ganja in front of tht: house bearing No. 14- 1 7-270, Mangalhat, Hyderabad, and on conducting a raid, the officials have noticed a person selling dry ganja, that immediately the officers and staff apprehended the said person/A. 1 and seized 1.

2 Kgs of dry ganj a from his possession under the cover of panchanama and that the said person/A. 1 in his confessional statement disclosed that he used to work for petitioner/A.2, that basing on the said report, the police have registered the above Crime No.334 of 2Ol9 for the aforesaid offences against A. 1 and the petitioner/A.2.

Heard iearned counsel for the petitioner/A.2 and the learned Additional Pubtic Prosecutor appearing for the respondent St.ate. Perused the material on record.

CSD, J Crl.P.No.29ll of 2019 l,earned counsel for the petitioner/A.2 contends that only basing on the confessional statement of A. 1, the police have implicated the petitioner/A.2 in a false case and that the petitioner/A.2 has nothing to do with the present crime. It is also contended that the petitioner/A.2 1S doing a private business and he never involved in any illegal transportation or sale of dry ganja and that the petitioner/A.2 has no criminal antecedents. It is also contended that the Court below has dismissed anticipatory bail application of the petitioner vide order dt.29.O5.2O19 in Crl.MP.No.1B01 of 2019. lt is also contended that most part of investigation has already been completed, except filing of charge sheet, and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any of the conditions imposed by this Court and would cooperate with the investigation, if he is released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the aforesaid crime. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the reiief sought in the above petition.

Admittedly, no contraband has been seized from the possession of the petitioner I A.2. Even at the time of seizure of the contraband from A. 1, there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner/A.2 is also present at the scene of offence, except a bald statement of A. 1 that he used to work for the petitioner/A.2. Therefore, by taking into consideration the nature of allegations made against the petitioner and also F-

Crl.P.l,lo.29li of 2019 keeping in vi,:u'the facts and circumstances of the case, I am {t inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner I A.2 by imposing some conditions.

/ In the result, the criminal petition is allowed and the petitioneri A.2 is directed to be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.334 of 2019 of Excise Police Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, on his executing a personal borLd for Rs.10,0OO/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two loca.l sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the said Station House Officer and subject to the condition (i) that the petitioner/A.2 would cooperate with the investigation agency and (ii) that the petitioner/A.2 would report before the above Police Station, on every Ttresday and Friday between 10-OO a.m. and 1 1-00 a.m. till completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet, whichever is earlier. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/- N.PURUSHOTHAM REDDY ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPY// FoT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To.

l. The I Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

2. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Hyderabad.

3. The Station House Officer, P.S. Excise Dhoolpet, Hyderabad.

4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court ofTelangana, at Hyderabad (OUT)

5. One CC to Sri Vikram Ragi, Advocate (OPUC)

6. one Spare copy \ I

t \ HIGH COURl'

GSD,J DATE: 14-6-2019

ORDER

CRL.P. NO.29tl oF 2019 ."s gtH + T PETITION ALLOl\/I]D 1/