2025:JHHC:37811 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI ABA No.6825 of 2025 Maksood Khan, aged about 27 years, son of Haneef Khan, resident of village Gausganj Sarai, P.O. Gausganj Sarai, P.S. Faridur, District Barely, Faridpur (Uttar Pradesh). …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party -------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. P.P. ------ 2/16.12.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No. 117 of 2021, corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023, registered under sections 15 (C)/25/29 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985, pending in the Court of the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner happened to be owner of the truck in question and the allegations are made that 110 bags of Doda was loaded on the truck. He next submits that the truck bearing No. UP-25AT-5583 was taken on hire by the transporter, namely, Sahajee Road Lines situated opposite Reliance Petrol Pump, Barely Road, Kichha, 263748, U.S. Nagar, Utrakhand. He further submits that the petitioner was paid Rs.70,000/- for transport of the paddy seeds from Sadarpur (U.P) to Bada Bazar (West Bengal) and after unloading the same, the driver has loaded the Doda without consent of the petitioner. He also submits that counter affidavit has been filed, wherein at para 10, it 2025:JHHC:37811 2 has been stated that the driver has stated that the truck belongs to the petitioner and he has instructed the driver to load the Doda, which is not correct. He submits that this fact is not in the case diary. He also submits that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in 22 of the petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the prayer and submits that the quantity of Doda is commercial and the petitioner happened to be the owner of the said truck and the driver has taken the name of the petitioner and the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation. In view of that, anticipatory bail may kindly not be granted. 5. On query made by the Court of statement made in para – 10 of the counter affidavit, where that fact has been stated by the driver that on instruction of the petitioner, the Doda was loaded, the learned counsel appearing for the State has gone through the case diary and submits, that fact has not come in the case diary. 6. In view of the above and considering that the petitioner happened to be owner of the truck, which was engaged in transport of Paddy by way of one of the transporter and the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent as disclosed in para-22 of the petition and in the case diary, this fact has not come that on instruction of the petitioner, the Doda was loaded on the truck, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the petitioner above named is directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from the date 2025:JHHC:37811 3 of receipt of the order and on the event of his surrender / arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty-Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount of each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi, in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No. 117 of 2021, corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 87 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 8. This Anticipatory Bail Application is accordingly allowed and disposed of. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) 16.12.2025 R.Kumar