[2026:JHHC:21558] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5243 of 2026 Ram Gopal, aged about 46 years, son of Patram, residence of Ward No.13, Kakra, Bikaner, P.O. and P.S. Bikaner, District- Bikaner (Rajasthan) … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Ayush Kr. Verma , Adv. For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Addl. PP 03 / 21.07.2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with NDPS Case No.23/2024 arising out of Namkum (Kharshidag) P.S. Case No.50/2024 instituted under Section 15(c), 18(B), 22(c), 25 and 29 of N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in transportation of 1800 kg. of poppy straw in a trailer driven by him. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as mentioned in paragraph 17 of the bail application. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in jail custody since 04.02.2024, as mentioned in para 16 of this bail application. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the poppy straw seized is 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 allegations and that there is no chance of him being not involved in any offence while on bail, the petitioner ought not be released on bail. It is next submitted that three witnesses who have been examined in this case, have supported the case of prosecution and 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 and recovery of opium in commercial quantity and also the facts that three witnesses who have been examined in this case, have supported the case of prosecution and in the absence of any material to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty of the allegations or that there is no chance of him not committing any offence if admitted to bail; this Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) Dated 21.07.2026 Smita/-