[2025:JHHC:11785 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3035 of 2025 ------ Sanika Pahan, S/O Bagray Pahan, Aged about 23 years, R/O-Village Bichagutu P.O. & P.S.-Maranghada, Dist.-Khunti, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kumar Rai, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Lily Sahay, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 21-04-2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Arki P.S. Case No.34 of 2024 corresponding to NDPS Case No.49(A)/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 18, 22 and 25 of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in transporting opium. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that police arrested two accused persons from the spot and on search, 1.03 K.G. opium was recovered from their possession. It is further submitted that the quantum of opium was seized under intermediary quantity. It is further submitted that the co-accused persons, who had no criminal antecedent, have been admitted to bail but the petitioner is an accused of another case also, in connection of which Arki P.S. Case No.37 of 2024 has been registered and the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner has already been rejected in that case. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will cooperate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.03.2024 as is evident from para-1 of the instant bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation as well as criminal antecedent of the petitioner, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding if released on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not be admitted to bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation as well as criminal antecedent of the petitioner and the fact that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding if released 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.) Rohit/