ORDER : 1. The Criminal Petition has been filed under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity ‘the BNSS’) seeking to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.107 of 2025 of Samisragudem Police Station, East Godavari District, registered against the Petitioner/Accused herein for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B)of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for brevity ‘the NDPS Act’). CASE OF THE PROSECUTION: 2. Material averments stemming from the prosecution are that on 03.09.2025 at 4.30 p.m. on receipt of credible information, the S.I of Police and his staff rushed to the spot. While conducting vehicle checking, noticed one car bearing No. AP 40 DU 2034 and found ganja weighing about 5.750 kgs from the Accused, the same was seized along with car, mobile and registered the above case. CONTENTIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: 3. Sri D. Ramakoteshwar Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence, and that there is no prima facie material or cogent evidence connecting the Petitioner to the commission of the crime. It is further contended that the Petitioner is the sole earning member of his family and that his incarceration would result in grave hardship and irreparable prejudice to his dependents. The Petitioner undertakes to comply with any condition that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to impose while considering the prayer for grant of bail. 4. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Tadiparru Village, Undrajavaram Mandal, East Godavari District and there exists no apprehension of his absconding or evading the due process of law. The Petitioner has extended full cooperation in the course of investigation and undertakes to continue such cooperation in all future proceedings. It is also urged that the nature of the allegations does not necessitate custodial interrogation, and that the imposition of appropriate conditions would suffice to secure the ends of justice. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be examined. In view of the foregoing, it is urged to allow the petition. ARGUMENTS OF THE STATE: 5. Per contra, Ms. P. Akhila Naidu, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, asserting that the investigation is at a nascent and critical stage, with several material witnesses yet to be examined. It is submitted that the premature enlargement of the Petitioner on bail would be inimical to the sanctity and efficacy of the ongoing investigative process and may engender deliberate non-cooperation on the part of the Petitioner. The prosecution further raises an apprehension that, if released, the Petitioner may exert undue influence upon, or intimidate, prosecution witnesses, thereby impeding the administration of justice and vitiating the evidentiary foundation of the case. It is also contended that there exists a palpable and imminent risk of the Petitioner absconding, thereby frustrating the due process of law. 6. In view of the gravity and allegations, coupled with the potential threat posed to the integrity of the investigation, it is submitted that the Petitioner is not entitled to the indulgence of discretionary relief and it is urged to dismiss the present Criminal Petition. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION: 7. In view of the rival submissions advanced by both the learned Counsel and upon a perusal of the prosecutorial narrative, the pivotal issue now meriting for consideration is: “Whether the Petitioner is entitled for grant of bail?” ANALYSIS: 8. The allegation against the Petitioner/ Sole Accused, on perusal of the record is that he has been indulged in dealing with possession of ganja weighing 5.7 Kgs. Material portion of the investigation in so far as Petitioner is concerned is completed. The Petitioner was arrested on 04.09.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 22 days. The Petitioner is a permanent resident of Tadiparru Village, Undrajavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are no adverse antecedent reported against the Petitioner. CONCLUSION: 9. The Petitioner was arrested on 04.09.2025. He has been in judicial custody for the past 22 days. The Petitioner is a permanent resident of Tadiparru Village, Undrajavaram Mandal, East Godavari District. The Petitioner has got fixed abode. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that there are no adverse antecedent reported against the Petitioner. CONCLUSION: 9. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the petitioner, his alleged role played in this case, and the period of detention undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the following stringent conditions: i. The Petitioner/Accused shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only), with two sureties each for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nidadavole. ii. The Petitioner/Accused shall appear before the Station House Officer, Samisragudem Police Station, East Godavari District, on every Saturday in between 10:00 am and 05:00 pm, till cognizance is taken by the learned the Trial Court. iii. The Petitioner/Accused shall not leave the limits of the State of Andhra Pradesh without prior permission from the Station House Officer concerned. iv. The Petitioner/Accused shall not commit or indulge in commission of any offence in future. v. The Petitioner/Accused shall cooperate with the investigating officer in further investigation of the case and shall make themselves available for interrogation by the investigating officer as and when required. vi. The Petitioner/Accused shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. vii. The Petitioner/Accused shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer. If he claims that he does not have a passport, he shall submit an affidavit to that effect to the Investigating Officer. 10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.