Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18173 (JHR)

SANNI KUMAR @ SUNNY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./4003/2026 · 2026-06-29

Anil Kumar Choudhary

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:JHHC:18949] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4003 of 2026 ------ Sanni Kumar @ Sunny Kumar, aged about 26 years, son of Late Najru Nat, resident of Sadar Hospital Chowk, Dome Toli, P.O. & P.S.- Daltonganj, District- Palamau, Jharkhand. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.03 Dated-29-06-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with NDPS Case No. 29 of 2025 arising out of Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No. 401 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 21(c), 22(c) and 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 25.02.2026 passed in B.A. No. 603 of 2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was in illegal possession of Codectuss cough syrup of 100 ml containing in each of 320 vials which comes under commercial quantity. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that without obtaining any FSL Report, charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner and charge has also been framed. It is also submitted that the petitioner led to the discovery of the 320 vials of 100 ml Codectuss cough syrup from the house of the co-accused. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-18 of the instant bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 19.09.2025 as mentioned in para-19 of the instant 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 in view of serial no. 239(4) of the table under the N.D.P.S. Act under Sections 2(vii- a) and (xxiii-a) in the column 5 & column 6 of the table relating to respective drugs shown in column 2 shall apply to the entire mixture or any solution or any one or more of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances of that particular drug in dosage form. It is next submitted that in view of the recovery of Codectuss cough syrup in commercial quantity, 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. It is further submitted that since the undisputed fact remains that in each of the vials of the Codectuss cough syrup, was the contents of the vials and the same is in no uncertain manner, mentioned over each of the vials and the same is also not disputed by the petitioner; so, in this case, the FSL Report is not essential. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the recovery of Codectuss cough syrup, the contents of which has undisputedly been mentioned in each of the vials and the same remains undisputed and in view of the seizure of the same in commercial quantity and in the absence of any 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, this Court is not inclined to admit the bail of the above named petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 29.06.2026 Saroj/