Jadav Nikhil, v. State Of Telangana P.S Cyberabad Narcotics.

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16903 of 2025 DATE: 31.12.2025 BETWEEN:

Jadhav Nikhil .....petitioner/accused No.2 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad.

.....Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused No.2 in Crime No.09 of 2025 before the Cyberabad Narcotics Police Station, TGANB, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 22(c), 20(b)(ii)(A) and 29 of NDPS Act.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, and another individual, were apprehended by the Cyberabad Narcotic PS on 24.09.2025, with 10.18 grams of MDMA and 52.67 grams of Hydroponic Ganja. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated and had no knowledge of the narcotic substance.

3.

Heard Sri P. Nishitah Raj, 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 had been falsely implicated at the instance of the de facto complainant and had no connection with the alleged offence and that no specific allegations were made against the petitioner, that the ingredients of Section 8(c) read with 22(c), 20(b)(ii)(A) and 29 of NDPS Act were not attracted, and that the police had registered the case with ulterior motives. He contended that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents, was a private employee supporting his family, and that investigation was almost completed. 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 the petitioner is a drug peddler. He further submitted that the investigation is in progress and if the petitioner is released on bail, at this stage, he may tamper with the evidence and may threaten the witnesses. Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss 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 25.09.2025. As seen from the record, the material part of the investigation has been completed and L.Ws.1 to 11 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 learned I Additional District Court, Malkajgiri.

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: 31.12.2025 SAI

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.16903 of 2025 Date: 31.12.2025 SAI