[2026:JHHC:21871 ] THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3083 of 2026 ------ Hindu Pahan, aged about 23 years, S/o Bhagta Pahan, R/o- Village- Karge, P.O. & P.S. Khunti, District- Khunti. .... .... …. Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party. ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.04 Dated- 23-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 36 of 2023(B) arising out of Maranghada P.S. Case No. 14 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 22, 25, 15(C) of the NDPS Act. This is the second journey of the petitioner for regular bail earlier the bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 19.09.2025 in B.A. No. 6833 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the fresh ground is that the petitioner has remained in custody for some more time and has been in custody since 21.01.2025. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. The learned Addl.P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the fact that the case involves the seizure of poppy crop in huge quantity i.e. 1320.500 Kg. which comes under commercial quantity, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS is attracted in this case and in absence of any material to be satisfied that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail more so as the 04 witnesses examined during trial of the case, have supported the case of the prosecution, as also the fact that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail; the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and in the absence of any material to show any reasonable ground to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail and also the fact that earlier the regular bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit and there is every chance of the petitioner of absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 23/07/2026 Amar/