[2026:JHHC:12255] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3463 of 2026 ------ Dipendar Somani @ Dipendra, aged about 54 years, Son of Nagin Das Somani, resident of Shop No. 124 Railway Market Golebazar, Kharagpur (M), P.O. & P.S. Kharagpur, District West Medinipur, (W.B.) .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Parth S.A.S. Pati, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-27-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 03 of 2026 (Bahragora P.S. Case No. 77 of 2025) registered for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) 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 Ganja and 20.05 Kg Ganja kept in illegal possession of the petitioner, was recovered from the petitioner. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that charge has already been framed in this case. It is also submitted that there is no independent witness in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 09.11.2025 as mentioned in para-6 of the instant bail application and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-14 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co- operate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned counsel appearing for the State on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view that narcotic drugs in commercial quantity was recovered from the possession of the petitioner, the rigors of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act is attracted in this case and in the absence of any material to be satisfied that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence, while on bail; the petitioner is not entitled to bail. It is next 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 to be released on bail. Considering the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner and in the absence of any reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the bail of the above named petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 27.04.2026 Saroj/