Sai Kumar Goud Palamalkula Alias P. Sai Kumar Goud v. The State Of Telangana
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA t lrll PETITION NO:'155 oF 2025 Between:
Sai Kumar Goud Palamalkula alias P. Sai Kumar Goud, S/ o. Saya 32 Years, Occ Business, R/ o. H. No. 3-123, Kachapur Vill Mandal, Kamareddy District.
AND The State.of Telangana, through S.H.O., P.S. Gajwet, Siddipet District, represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad
...Respondent
Petition under Section 482 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner/ Accused No. 4 by directing the S.H.O., P.S. Gajwel, Siddipet District, or any arresting officer, to enlarge him on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with F.l.R. No. 395 of 2025, of p.S. Gajwel, Siddipet District.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr K VENUMADHAV, Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr D. ARUN KUMAR, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the sole Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER
b
IN THE IIIGH COURT F1OR THE STATE OF TEIIINGANA
AT I{YDERABN) TTIE HONOT'RABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PEfmON No.15558 of 2A25 loth DAY OF ,xvF, Between:
Sai KumarPEITIIONER The State of Telangana, Rep by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangan a, at Hyderabad.
RESPONDENT Clftrtil This Criminal Petition is filed before this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner who is arrayed as accused No. 4 in FIR.No.395 of 2025 before the Gajwel Police Station, Siddipet District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 22(cl of NDPS Act.
2.
The prosecution case states that on26.09.2025, the Sub-lnspector of Police, Gajwel, received credible information that toddy mixed with Alprazolam was being sold at a toddy shop in Pallepahad, Gajwel Mandal. After securing mediators and a clues team, a raid was conducted, during which the accused Taduri Laxman Goud was found in
\-It possession of 54.10 grams of Alprazolam along with several other adulterating substances, toddy bottles, and a mobile phone. Based on his confession, the police apprehended co-accused Srikanth Gotrd at Narsingi, who disclosed that he had procured Alprazolam from Methuku Narsimulu Goud of Islampur. Subsequently, Methuku Narsimulu was also apprehended, and 145.82 grams of Alprazolam, a weighing machine, a mobile phone, and a car allegedly used for transport were seized' All material objects were sealed, documented, and produced before the police station, after which crime No. 395/ 2025 was registered under sections 8(c), 29 rlw 22(c) of the NDPS Act and investigation was entrusted to Sri V. Raghupathi, SI of Police' 3.
Heard Sri K.Venu Madhav, learned counsel for petitioner, and 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 is innocent of the alleged offences and is no way connected to the possession of illegal substance. Therefore, he prayed the court to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition' 5.
On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, stating that the allegations against the petitioner are of a
serious nature, and lamented that if the petitioner is granted the relief of pre arrest bail, he may indulge in similar offences. Therefore, prayed this Court to dismiss the criminal petition.
6.
Having regard to rival submissions made, and on going through the material placed on record, it is noted that the limited grievance of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the case and that petitioner is no way concerned with the alleged offence punishable under NDPS Act, as no contraband was seized from his possession, whereas, it is the specific stand of learned Additional pubtic Prosecutor that petitioner is actively involved with ) ) other accused in his illegal activitiesI T - At this stage, it is pertinent to note that in cases arising under the NDPS Act, the Court is required to exercise great caution while considering a prayer for anticipatory bail, keeping in view the nature of allegations, gravity of the offence, and the necessit5r of custodial interrogation for a fair and effective investigation.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dinesh Chander v. State of Haryanal, affirmed the view of High Court observing that where the investigation material disclose a pima facie link of the accused with the alleged offence, such as his involvement being reflected from statements of co-accused, electronic communication, or linancial transactions, the grant of pre- ' sLp (crt.) No.
arrest protection would seriously hamper the process of investigation. The settled position of law is that anticipatory bail is not to be granted as a matter of routine or on mere assertion of innocence, particularly when the investigation is at a nascent stage and the role of the petitioner requires thorough examination. In such circumstances, the Court may rightly decline to extend the discretionar5r relief of anticipatory bail. 8.
In view thereof, this Criminal petition is dismissed Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. Sd/- U. SUDHA ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To
1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Gajwel
2. The Station House Officer, Gajwel Police Station, Siddipet District,
3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]
4. One CC to Mr. K VENUMADHAV, Advocate IOPUC]
5. Two CD Copies RC/PR f,Xe,
HIGH COURT DATED-. 10t12t2025 S TA,
ORDER
\ CRLP.No.15558 of 2025 -,?
O B JAN 2IJ2[ .t.
t .,1 Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is Dismissed s/'1"