2025:JHHC:16347 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3342 of 2025 ------ 1. Arun Kumar Yadav @ Arun Yadav, aged about 45 years, S/o Krishna Yadav. 2. Arbind Yadav, aged about 46 years, S/o Late Namdhari Yadav. 3. Rameshwar Yadav, aged about 48 years, S/o Late Saryu Yadav. 4. Jamindar Yadav @ Amindar Yadav, aged about 35 years, S/o Shivnath Yadav 5. Tilak Yadav, aged about 44 years, S/o Bhim Yadav 6. Ramesh Bhuian aged about 42 years, S/o Late Padwa Bhuiyan. 7. Aman Bhuian, aged about 25 years, S/o Budhram Bhuiyan 8. Kulesh Bhuian, aged about 53 years, S/o Pachiya Kunwar, 9. Rupesh Kumar Yadav @ Rupesh Yadav, aged about 31 years, S/o Devnandar Yadav, 10. Malku Yadav, aged about 32 years, S/o Sohrai Yadav, 11. Nagdev Bhuian @ Nagdev, aged about 66 years, S/o Late Balo 12. Umesh Bhuian, aged about 24 years, S/o Baijnath Bhuiyan, 13. Chunmun Yadav, aged about 33 years, S/o Prakash Yadav, 14. Ramdheshwari Yadav, aged about 69 years, S/o Late Namdhari Yadav, 15. Sahodar Yadav, aged about 38 years, S/o Late Lala Yadav, Petitioner No. 1, 3, 4, 5, 9, 13 and 15 are resident of Jamungadha, Kerkarhgarh P.O. + P.S. Panki, District- Palamau (Jharkhand) Petitioner no. 2 and 14 are resident of Jayrawan, Kerkarhgarh P.O. Panki, P.S.-Panki, District-Palamau (Jharkhand) Petitioner No. 6, 7, 8, 11 and 12 are resident of Lambitar, Kerkarhgarh P.O. Panki, P.S.-Panki, District-Palamau (Jharkhand) Petitioner no. 10 is resident of Jhiriniya, Kerkarhgarh P.O.- Panki, P.S.-Panki, District-Palamau (Jharkhand) …. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s):Mr. Anurag Kashyap,Advocate. For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P. ----- 02/ 20.06.2025 Heard the parties. 2025:JHHC:16347 2 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 and 484 of BharatiyaNagarikSurakshaSanhita, 2023 has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for offences registered under Sections 8 (B), 18(B) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge under N.D.P.S. Act, Palamau. 3. The prosecution case is that a raiding team upon information raided the village Kekargarh who found some persons working in the field. When they reached there, they found the opium plantation. They seized some samples and destroyed the crops. Upon query some of the witnesses stated that it is these petitioners who were cultivating opium. On the basis of the said information, the FIR was lodged. 4. This is a case of illegal cultivation of opium in the forest of village Kekargarh. As there are witnesses whose statement were recorded by the police that it is these petitioners who are involved in illegal cultivation of opium, I am not inclined to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners. 5. This Anticipatory Bail Application stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Rashmi/Cp-3