IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 209 of 2025 ------ 1. Afjal Ansari @ Md. Afjal, aged about 37 years, Son of Md. Suleaman Ansari, resident of 83, Madhya Panchayat, PCC, Barkagaon, P.O. and P.S. Barkagaon, District –Hazaribagh. 2. Bablu Ansari @ Md. Istiyak, aged about 23 years, Son of Kolha Miyan, resident of 423, Ansari Muhalla, Barkagaon, P.O. and P.S. –Barkagaon, District –Hazaribagh. … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar, Advocate For the State : Mr. N.K. Ganjhu, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21.01.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No.269 of 2024 registered under sections 21(b) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985. The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were involved in selling of Brown Sugar (Heroin) and from the possession of the co-accused persons 5.4 gram of Brown Sugar (Heroin) was recovered and they disclosed that they used to purchase the Brown Sugar (Heroin) from the petitioners. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-11of the instant anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that no incriminating articles were recovered from the petitioners and except the confessional statement of the co-accused persons, there is no material in the record to implicate the petitioners in this case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that keeping in view that substantial amount of Heroin has been recovered from the co-accused persons, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is required during the investigation of the case to find out the source of supply of Brown Sugar (Heroin). Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioners and the requirement of custodial interrogation to find out the source of supply of Brown Sugar (Heroin), this Court is not inclined to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail to the abovenamed petitioners is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-