[2026:JHHC:24740] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7737 of 2026 ------ Ram Shrestha Paswan @ Ram Shrashth Paswan, aged about 41 years, S/o Late Amrit Paswan, R/o Village-Ram Nagar Mandi, Govindpur, P.O.-Govind Nagar, P.S.- Mandi, District- Fatehgarh (Punjab). .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Shiv Prasad Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-18-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with NDPS P.S. Case No. 62 of 2024 arising out of CID P.S. Case No. 6 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 15, 18, 22, 27, 27A, 29 of the NDPS 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 rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 05.01.2026 passed in B.A. No. 10957 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in transportation of 1491.450 Kg.- of Doda-also known is Poppy Straw, which comes under commercial quantity and the only fresh ground is that the petitioner in the meanwhile has remained in custody for some more time and co-accused person has been admitted to bail. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and also undertakes not to annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during 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 keeping in view the recovery of Doda which is also known as poppy straw, 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 for this Court 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. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and in the absence of any reasonable ground for this Court for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 18.08.2026 Amar/