[2026:JHHC:21162] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6559 of 2026 ------ Hari Pado Manjhi, aged about 64 years, Son of Late Bholanath Manjhi, resident of Village: Manjhi Tola, Bundu, PO & PS: Bundu, District- Ranchi. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Ashim Kr. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Spl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-17-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Arki P.S. Case No. 28 of 2024 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 39(A) of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 15(c), 22, 25 of the N.D.P.S. Act. This is the third journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was twice rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 24.06.2025 passed in B.A. No. 4961 of 2025 and order dated 21.11.2025 passed in B.A. No. 10629 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that in the meanwhile, two witnesses have been examined in this case and both of them are police personnel but neither of them stated anything to implicate the petitioner in this case rather they failed to identify the petitioner who was in custody from their respective examination as witness in the court. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the co-accused namely Hare Krishna Mahto, with similar allegations, has already been admitted to bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.08.2025 passed in B.A. No.4890 of 2025. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.02.2025 as mentioned in para-16 of the instant bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-19 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes 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 opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the fact that the two prosecution witnesses including the informant examined during the trial have not stated anything to implicate the petitioner in this case and the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-19 of the bail application, this Court is of the considered view that there is reasonable round to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Hence, this is a fit case where the above-named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, NDPS, Khunti in connection with Arki P.S. Case No. 28 of 2024 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 39(A) of 2024 with the condition that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card in the court below with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 17.07.2026 Saroj/