[2026:JHHC:20763] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6532 of 2026 ------ Pator Pahan @ Pankaj Pahan, aged about 28 years, Son of Dolka Pahan, resident of Village- Nachaldag, P.O. and P.S.- Namkum, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kr. Chouhan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-14-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.48 of 2024 arising out of Khunti P.S. Case No.83 of 2024 registered under Section 15 (c), 18 and 25 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act. This is the fourth journey of the petitioner with the self-same prayer for regular bail as earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on merit thrice i.e. last by this Court vide order dated 18.04.2026 passed in B.A. No.3186 of 2026. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in sale and purchase of Poppy Straw and in connection with this case, 199.5 Kg of Poppy Straw was recovered from the house of the co-accused person on the petitioner leading to recovery of the same and the petitioner was also arrested from the spot. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that in the order dated 05.05.2026 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.4729 of 2026, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India exercised its jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in that case and granted him bail when 22.950 Kg of Ganja was involved in that case and charge was also framed by the trial court yet not a single witness was examined. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody for the past more than one year. It is next submitted that the petitioner is also involved in another case of Narcotic Drugs but in the said N.D.P.S. Case No.25 of 2019 arising out of Khunti P.S. Case No.45 of 2019, the petitioner has been admitted to regular bail. It is further submitted that the co-accused Balu Munda has also been admitted to regular bail on 12.12.2024 without recording the satisfaction as is required under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 18.06.2024. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Superintendent, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai v. R. Paulsamy reported in (2000) 9 SCC 549 is binding upon this Court wherein it has been held that the finding in terms of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act is sine qua non for granting bail to an accused involved in offence under the said Act involving commercial quantity of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances and in this case as Narcotic Drugs in commercial quantity is involved, hence, 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 offence alleged and that there is no chance of his being not involved in any offence while on bail, more so because this is the second case of Narcotic Drugs in which the petitioner is involved, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if released on bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and in view of involvement of Poppy Straw in commercial quantity having been seized on being led to recovery by the petitioner of having been kept in the house of the co-accused namely Balu Munda and in view of the binding precedent in the case of Superintendent, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai v. R. Paulsamy (Supra) and in the absence of any material to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty of the allegations and that there is no chance of his being not committing any offence while on bail as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence as also his criminal antecedent of being involved in another case involving the offence punishable under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated-14.07.2026-Animesh/