IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.4052 of 2024 ------ Manish Kumar Dangi aged about 25 years Son of Vijay Kumar Dangi Resident of Village-Lowagada, P.O. and P.S.-Sadar, District- Chatra. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party With A.B.A. No.7318 of 2024 ------ Suryavanshi Kumar @ Suryavanshi Kumar Verma, aged about 19 years, son of Awadh Kishor Verma, resident of Gandhariya, P.O. & P.S.-Sadar, District-Chatra. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Amit Kr. Choubey, Advocate : Ms. Anshu Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, Addl.P.P. : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl.P.P. ------ Order No.06 Dated- 14/02/2025 Heard the parties. Since, both these anticipatory bail applications have been filed with the common prayer, hence, both these anticipatory bail applications disposed of by this common order. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.240 of 2023 instituted under sections 18, 22, 27 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners are the supplier of opium and opium in commercial quantity was seized from the possession of the co-accused person. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. It is further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Learned Spl.P.P. and the learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner-Manish Kumar Dangi of A.B.A. No.4052 of 2024 is a history sheeter being involved in 4 other cases out of which 3 cases involve the penal provisions of the NDPS Act, 1985. It is next submitted that in view of the Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 as opium in commercial quantity has undisputedly been recovered, the condition precedent for granting bail to the petitioners is that; there must be reason for believing that the petitioners are not guilty of the offence alleged and they are not likely to commit any offence while on bail, but in the absence of any such material, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required during the investigation of the case in order to find out the supply chain and network of the Narcotic Drugs. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioners ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the requirement of their custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case and also in the absence of any material to suggest that the petitioners are not guilty of the offence alleged nor there is any material to suggest that the petitioners are 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 above-named petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Abhiraj/