( 2026:JHHC:24516 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7651 of 2026 ------ Raju Rajbhar @ Raju Rabhar, aged about 46 years, S/o Late Shambhu Rajbhar @ Shambhu Rabhar, R/o Village + P.O.-Majhdia & P.S.-Krishnaganj, Dist.-Nadia, West Bengal. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Ms. Arti Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 14-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Rail (Muri) P.S. Case No.11 of 2025 (N) registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)C/29 of the NDPS Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in sale and purchase of Ganja and altogether, 46 kg of Ganja was recovered in this case out of which 32 kg of Ganja was recovered from the petitioner and the co-accused Jai Prakash Rajbhar. It is next submitted that from the possession of the petitioner, 16 kg of Ganja was recovered which comes under intermediate quantity. It is next submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner does not know how many witnesses have been examined in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-11 of this bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and also undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant/victim or the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.12.2025 as has been mentioned in para-10 of this bail application. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the Ganja was recovered 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 offences and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, the petitioner ought not be released on bail. It is next submitted that 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 as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with evidence as also in the absence of any material for this Court to be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offences and that he is not likely to commit 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.) 14/08/2026 Abhiraj/