JUDGMENT Lalitha Kanneganti, J. - This petition is filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C by the petitioner/A-8 seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.212 of 2020 on the file of Bhimavaram I Town Police Station, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, which was registered for the offence punishable under Section 8 r/w 29(b) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity "NDPS Act"). 2. Heard Sri K.Chidambaram, learned counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 3. The case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that on 22.06.2020 at around 7.15p.m. the S.I of Police, Bhimavaram I Town Police Station along with his staff was conducting vehicle check at Gunupudi Centre, they found A-1 coming on motorcycle and on search they found 1.100 KGs of Ganja and seized the same under the cover of mediators report. Later basing on the confession of A-1, police arrested A-2 to A-4 at 9.15 p.m. on the same day and recorded their confession statements and seized 1.200 KGs of Ganja. Basing on the confession of A-2 to A-4, police arrested A-5 and A-6 at 11.45 p.m. on the same day, recorded their confession statements and seized Ganja from their possession. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner who is arrayed as A-8 is falsely implicated only basing on confession of A-1. The petitioner has no acquaintance with A1 or any other accused. He submits that the petitioner is added as an accused by the police without their being any prima facie material against him to connect with the crime. He further submits that the remand report of A-1 to A-6 shows that the investigation so far made would disclose that A-1 and A-7 of Bhimavaram were bringing the drug pills from his co-son-in-law i.e. the petitioner/A-8, besides the business of ganja. Learned counsel would draw the attention of this Court to the remand report and tried to impress the Court that all the allegations are against A-7, who is co-brother of A-8 i.e. petitioner. 5. Learned counsel would draw the attention of this Court to the remand report and tried to impress the Court that all the allegations are against A-7, who is co-brother of A-8 i.e. petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the police came to the house of petitioner and insisted the petitioner and his wife to furnish bank details and started harassing them, the petitioner along with family members of A-7 filed a writ petition on 22.06.2020 before this Court, wherein they have questioned the high handed acts of police in interfering with life and liberty of the petitioner and his family members. Learned counsel submits that since the petitioner filed the writ petition against the police, he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would finally submit that the other accused were granted regular bail by the Court below and hence he sought to grant anticipatory bail. 6. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor on instructions would submit that the investigation so far done reveals that the petitioner has played a major role in this crime and A-7 is bringing drug pills from his co-son-in-law i.e. A-8 at Eluru. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is at threshold and they are yet to bring out the material information relating to the offence and the custodial investigation of the petitioner/A-8 is required. He also submits that the petitioner has filed Crl.M.P.No.130 of 2020 on the file of Special Judge under NPPS Act-cum-I Additional District & Sessions Judge, West Godavari at Eluru seeking anticipatory bail and the same was dismissed on 10.07.2020. 7. This Court having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor and on perusal of material on record, it clearly shows the involvement of the petitioner in the crime and specific overt acts are attributed against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. 8. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner/A-8 can surrender himself before the lower Court and on such surrender, the Court shall consider the bail application of the petitioner on the same day itself as per law. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications are closed.