[2025:JHHC:19069] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5725 of 2025 ------ Ravi Ranjan Choudhary @ Vishnu Kumar aged about 20 years, son of Late Satyanarayan Pandey @ Satyanarayan Choudhary, Permanent Resident of Bhakura, Post and P.S.- Bhakura, District- Bhojpur (Bihar) 802205. At Present- Road No.10, Adityapur-1, P.O.- Adityapur, P.S.- R.I.T., Dist.- Saraikella (Kharsawan) .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Shankar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 14-07-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No.64 of 2025 registered under Section 21 (c) and 22 (b) of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in sale and purchase of narcotic drugs and 475 bottles of Wincerex Cough Syrup each containing 100 ml was recovered inside the sack carried by the petitioner and 360 bottles of Wincerex Cough Syrup each containing 100 ml were recovered from the courier service. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 12.04.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that narcotic drugs in commercial quantity has been recovered from the petitioner, the rigors of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 is attracted in this case and in the absence of any material to show that there is reasonable ground for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. It is also submitted that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and in the absence of any material to suggest that there is reasonable ground for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/