( 2026:JHHC:18196 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5561 of 2026 ------ Ledam Majhi, aged about 36 years, s/o Late Rode Majhi, R/o Village Hensakocha, P.O. and P.S.-Chowka, Dist.-Seraikella-Kharsawan, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Viswanath Roy, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 22-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Chowka P.S. Case No.40 of 2024 corresponding to NDPS Case No.38 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 290, 420, 467, 468, 471 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 15 & 22 of the NDPS Act and under Section 47(a) of Excise Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was in illegal possession of 427.7 kg Doda which is also known as poppy straw, which comes under commercial quantity. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner was not present in his house from where the Doda was recovered and the said house does not belong to the petitioner. It is also submitted that there is no independent witness of the case. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.09.2025 as is evident from para-05 of this bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the Doda which is also known as poppy straw was recovered in commercial quantity; the rigors of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 is attracted in this case and in the absence of any material to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, the petitioner ought not be released on bail. It is next submitted that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding if released on bail. It is lastly submitted that the prayer of the petitioner for bail, be rejected. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with evidence as also in the absence of any material for this Court to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences and that he is not likely to commit any offence if admitted to bail; this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 22/06/2026 Abhiraj/