( 2025:JHHC:17773 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5182 of 2025 ------ Ajay Ganjhu @ Ajay Kumar Bhokta, aged about 21 years, son of Dineshwar Ganjhu @ Dina Ganjhu, resident of Village- Pahaswar, P.O.-Kurkheta, P.S.-B.Nagar, Dist.-Chatra … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj D. Munda, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 03.07.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Bashistanagar P.S. Case No.44 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under sections 18(b)/28/29 of N.D.P.S. Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in sell of opium and 15 kg of opium and 3.5 KG of liquid opium has been seized in connection with this case. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and from the house of the petitioner the alleged contraband was seized but there is no signature of any family member of the petitioner on the seizure list. It is further submitted that recovery of 3.5 kg of liquid substance of opium is a planted recovery. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.17 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 21.01.2025, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 19 of the bail application. It is next submitted as per the FSL report, no Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance was detected in the contents of polythene container marked A weighing 15 kg but morphine and other alkaloids of opium was detected in the contents of the polythene container marked B weighing 3.5 kg. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that opium in commercial quantity was recovered from the house of the petitioner, which comes under commercial quantity, the rigors of Section 37 of Section Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act is attracted and in the absence of any reasonable ground for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the fact that the opium in commercial quantity has been recovered from the house of the petitioner and in the absence of any reasonable ground for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the abovenamed petitioner be admitted to bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the abovenamed petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/