Bail Granted as Charge Sheet Unfiled After 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has underscored the sanctity of personal liberty by granting bail to an accused in an NDPS case who remained incarcerated for 208 days without the prosecution filing a charge sheet. Overturning prolonged pre-trial detention in the absence of a timely police report, the decision reiterates strict judicial intolerance toward procedural delay by investigating authorities.

A single-judge bench comprising Dr. Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao heard the petition under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail for an accused facing prosecution under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Court's Analysis and Strict Pre-Conditions for Release

The High Court observed that despite the accused remaining in judicial custody for 208 days following his arrest on February 4, 2026, the prosecution failed to file a charge sheet even after the completion of 180 days. Noting that co-accused Nos. 2 to 5 had already been enlarged on regular bail and that no adverse antecedents were reported against the petitioner, the bench found it fit to grant bail.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "On perusal of the record, even after completion of 180 days of the judicial custody of the petitioner/accused No.1, charge sheet has not been filed. The Petitioner was arrested on 04.02.2026. He has been in judicial custody for the past 208 days... Accused Nos.2 to 5 were already enlarged on regular bail... There are no similar adverse antecedents reported against him."

The Court has following directions:

"i. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall be enlarged on bail subject to his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties for the like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore, SPSR Nellore.
ii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each and every adjournment without fail.
iii. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 shall not indulge in the commission of a similar offence. If he indulges in the commission of a similar offence, the bail granted to the Petitioner shall stand automatically cancelled.
iv. The Petitioner/Accused No.1 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."

Background

The case arose out of Crime No. 37 of 2026 registered at Naidupet Urban Police Station under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 against the petitioner. The petitioner submitted that he was innocent, falsely implicated, and the sole earning member of his family. Opposing the plea, the State argued that the investigation was ongoing, material witnesses were yet to be examined, and there was a risk of the petitioner absconding.

Taking note of the facts that an earlier bail application was dismissed when the petitioner had completed only 64 days in custody, but that he had now spent 208 days in custody without a charge sheet being filed, the High Court allowed the criminal petition.

Case Details:
Case No.: CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7112/2026
Neutral Citation: 2026:APHC:35231
Case Title: Mukesh Giri Vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): BHOOMA MAHARSHI REDDY
For the Respondent(s): PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (A. Sai Rohith, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Source: 2026 CaseBase(AP) 13808