Akram Ranjith Kumar v. State Of Telangana Through Sho, Ps Suraram,

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9520 of 2026 DATE: 01.07.2026 BETWEEN:

Akram Ranjith Kumar .....petitioner/accused No.2 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 praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.2 in Crime No.790 of 2025 before the Suraram Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offence

punishable under Sections 8c read with 22c, 20(b)(ii)(A), 27(b) and 29 of NDPS Act.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/A-2 is accused in Crime No.79 of 2025 of Suraram Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(A), 22(c), 27(b) and 29 of the NDPS Act, on the allegation that he was found in possession of MDMA and ganja during a police raid conducted on 26.12.2025. 3.

Heard Sri M. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 27.12.2025, only a non-commercial quantity was allegedly recovered from him, investigation is completed, and the final report is awaited. He further contended that the offences are not attracted against the petitioner, he satisfies the conditions for bail, and continued incarceration is unwarranted. Therefore, he prayed

the Court to grant bail to the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

5.

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioner under the NDPS Act. He further submitted that the FSL report and final report are yet to be filed and, therefore, grant of bail at this stage is not warranted. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the 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 27.12.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 10 witnesses have been examined. Till now, no charge sheet is filed. 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 I Additional Metropolitan District and Sessions Judge-cum-Additional Family Court Judge, MedchalMalkajgiri District at Kushaiguda.

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: 01.07.2026 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9520 of 2026 Date: 01.07.2026 SAI