In Nellore, six individuals were arrested in separate incidents related to drug peddling, with a total of 6.5 kg of ganja seized by police over the course of three days. The arrests occurred at different locations, including near the Nellore West Railway Station and a parking area associated with the station.

On June 16, police apprehended three suspects who were found in possession of 3.5 kg of ganja valued at ₹70,000. Among them was Bappi Sahu, originally from Khordha in Odisha but residing in Muthukur within SPSR Nellore district. He reportedly purchased ganja at a price ranging from ₹5,000 to ₹6,000 per kg in Odisha and sold it for ₹20,000 per kg to two local buyers identified as Sk. Mabhasha and Sk. Rafi.

Earlier on June 14, another trio was arrested at the Two-wheeler Parking area of the same railway station while possessing three kg of ganja worth ₹60,000. The individuals involved were P. Rajesh and P.V. Harish from Nellore and A. James from Chennai; they had been acquiring ganja for approximately ₹2,300 per kg in Odisha before selling it at inflated prices locally.

Both sets of arrests led to charges being filed under Section 8 (c) read with Section 20 (b) clause 2 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 for illegal possession involving small quantities of contraband substances.

Original article

The provided text exhibits a multitude of biases, ranging from cultural and ideological to linguistic and semantic. One of the most striking aspects is the cultural bias towards law enforcement and the state. The text presents the police as heroes, "seizing" ganja and apprehending suspects in a manner that implies their actions are justified and necessary. This framing reinforces a narrative that law enforcement is always acting in the best interests of society, without questioning their methods or motivations. The use of words like "seized" also creates a sense of drama and urgency, which serves to further emphasize the importance of police action.

Furthermore, the text exhibits an ideological bias towards prohibitionism. The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of 1985 is presented as a legitimate tool for combating drug trafficking, without any critique or discussion of its potential flaws or unintended consequences. This reinforces a narrative that prohibition is an effective means of reducing drug use and related crime, despite evidence to the contrary. The text also assumes that drug users are inherently problematic individuals who need to be controlled by law enforcement, rather than addressing underlying issues such as poverty or lack of access to healthcare.

The text also reveals racial and ethnic bias through its portrayal of suspects from different backgrounds. Bappi Sahu is described as being originally from Odisha but residing in Muthukur within SPSR Nellore district, which implies that he is an outsider who has brought his illicit activities with him from elsewhere. In contrast, P.Rajesh and P.V.Harish are described as being from Nellore, implying that they are local residents who have been corrupted by external influences (i.e., Odisha). This framing reinforces stereotypes about certain groups being more prone to crime or deviance.

In terms of linguistic bias, the text employs emotionally charged language to describe drugs as "contraband substances" rather than simply referring to them as substances or chemicals. This creates a negative connotation around drugs themselves rather than addressing issues related to their production or distribution.

The selection and omission bias in this article can be seen when it only mentions arrests made by police over three days without providing context on how these incidents relate to broader societal issues such as poverty rates in Nellore district or whether there have been any other efforts made by authorities outside policing (e.g., health services) aimed at addressing substance abuse problems locally.

Moreover structural bias can be observed when discussing arrests under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b) clause 2 NDPS Act; it does not delve into systemic problems such as corruption within law enforcement agencies which may contribute towards perpetuating illegal activities like drug peddling but instead focuses solely on individual culpability reinforcing existing power dynamics between those enforcing laws versus those subjecting themselves under them.



Additionally temporal bias can be detected when mentioning specific dates (June 14th & June 16th), which may create an impression that these events occurred independently without considering historical context regarding patterns & trends surrounding substance abuse over time.



Lastly confirmation bias can be observed through presentation one-sided evidence supporting assumption about efficacy prohibitionist policies while excluding counterarguments based alternative approaches tackling root causes addiction.



Overall this analysis demonstrates how various forms biases operate simultaneously reinforce dominant narratives surrounding substance abuse criminal justice systems reinforcing social hierarchies while obscuring complexities underlying issues at hand