Mohan Manikandan vs. The Superintendent Of Customs (Preventive)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Accused Nos. 1 and 2, filed these criminal petitions seeking bail. They were apprehended on 02.05.2026 at RGI Airport, Hyderabad, upon arrival from Kuala Lumpur. Officers intercepted petitioner No. 1 and seized 5800 grams of a substance suspected to be ganja, concealed in bags. Petitioner No. 1 allegedly confessed to receiving the bags from an unknown person in Kuala Lumpur and handing them over to a receiver at the airport. The alleged offences are punishable under Sections 20, 23, and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since 03.05.2026.
Held
The Court allowed the criminal petitions and granted regular bail to the petitioners/Accused Nos. 1 and 2. The Court reasoned that while the respondent contended Section 27(a) of the NDPS Act was applicable, the alleged offences were under Sections 20, 23, and 29 of the NDPS Act. Crucially, the Court found that since the quantity of contraband seized was an intermediate quantity, the stringent conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not attracted. Considering the petitioners' period of incarceration since 03.05.2026 and the intermediate quantity of ganja seized, the Court deemed it fit to grant bail. The petitioners were directed to execute personal bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each with two sureties, appear before the respondent authorities every Wednesday for eight weeks or until the charge sheet is filed, and abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 480(3) of BNSS (formerly Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.).
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), considering the quantity of contraband seized and the period of their judicial custody? Petitioner's argument: The petitioners contended that they are innocent, falsely implicated, and that the seized contraband (5800 grams) constitutes an intermediate quantity. They have been in judicial custody for over 45 days, and the investigation is complete, thus further interrogation is unnecessary. They sought regular bail. Respondent's argument: The respondent opposed the bail, arguing that although the seized quantity is intermediate, the act of importing it from India to Malaysia falls under Section 27(a) of the NDPS Act. Consequently, Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies, making the petitioners ineligible for bail. The respondent also stated that the investigation is not yet complete.
Sections Cited
Section 20, Section 23, Section 29, Section 37, Section 27(a), Section 480, Section 480(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
COMMON ORDER
These two Criminal Petitions are filed under Sections 480 & 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
- 2 - crlp_7828&7843_2026 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively seeking to enlarge them on bail in connection with Crime No. HQPOR No.09/2026-CUS (PREV) on the file of Customs Preventive, Customs Commissionerate, Hyderabad, The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 20, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. 2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the passenger profiling, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 were travelling from Kuala Lumpur to Hyderabad by Air Asia Airlines flight, which landed on 02.05.2026 at around 23:00 hours at the RGI Airport, Hyderabad, suspected to be carrying some contraband, the officers of AIU, in the presence of independent witnesses, intercepted the petitioner-accused No.1 and seized 5800 grams of substance suspected to be ganja, a narcotic substance specified under the NDPS Act which was concealed in false chambers found in 2 blue coloured bags. It is stated that upon questioning about the contents of the bags, he confessed that those bags were handed over to him by an unknown person in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and he confessed that he handed over the same to the receiver waiting at Airport.
- 3 - crlp_7828&7843_2026 3. Heard Sri Syed Osman, learned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 and Sri M.Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State.
The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent of the offences alleged against them and they were falsely implicated in this case; that the seized contraband i.e., 5800 grams is an intermediate quantity; that the petitioners were in judicial custody since 03.05.2026; that the petitioners were in jail for more than 45 days; that as entire investigation is completed, further interrogation of the petitioners is not required, as such requested the Court to grant regular bail to the petitioners.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed the same and submits that though the seized contraband is 5800 grams, the same was imported from India to Malaysia, which comes under Section 27 (a) of the NDPS Act and as such Section 37 of the NDPS Act applies to the present case and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for bail at this stage and investigation is also not completed and hence, he prays to dismiss the petitions.
- 4 - crlp_7828&7843_2026
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both parties, although the learned counsel for the respondent contended that Section 27(a) of the NDPS Act is applicable, the alleged offences against the petitioners are under Sections 20, 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act. Since the quantity of contraband allegedly seized is an intermediate quantity, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted. The petitioners were in judicial custody since 03.05.2026. Considering the period of incarceration of the petitioners in judicial custody and quantity of ganja seized, this Court deems it fit to grant regular bail to the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 and 2 subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 shall execute 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 XXV Additional Judicial Magistrate, Rajendarnagar, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District.
(ii) On such release, the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 shall appear before the respondent authorities between 09:00 a.m., and 5:00 p.m., on every Wedne ay for a period of eight (8) weeks or till filing of charge sheet whichever is earlier, for the purpose of investigation, and thereafter, as and when required.
(iii) The petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 437 (3) of Cr.P.C. (presently, Section 480 (3) of BNSS).
- 5 - crlp_7828&7843_2026
Accordingly, these two Criminal petitions are allowed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 12.06.2026 YVL
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.