[2026:JHHC:25147] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7837 of 2026 ------ Amit Kumar Sah, aged about 29 years, Son of Ashok Kumar Sah, Resident of Village – Ambakola, Tola – Dhanwaygadi, Pujhardih, P.S. – Chandramandih, P.O. – Mohanpur, District – Jamui, Bihar .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Naveen Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate Mrs. Nutan Kumari Sharma For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated:-20-08-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No. 45 of 2026 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 12 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)C, 22(c), 25 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in transportation and sale of Ganja and 33.25 Kgs. of Ganja was recovered from the possession of the petitioner; out of which, 13.499 Kgs. of Ganja was recovered from his car whereas 19.25 Kgs. of Ganja was recovered from his rented accommodation. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the owner of the rented accommodation of the petitioner namely Prakash Mandal has also been co-accused in this case; so, Prakash Mandal is liable for recovery of 19.25 Kgs. of Ganja and the petitioner is only liable and responsible for transportation of 13.499 Kgs. of Ganja. It is also submitted that the petitioner is also involved in another criminal case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 02.04.2026 as mentioned in para-01 of the instant bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing 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 on the other hand opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the fact that the Ganja in commercial quantity has been recovered, 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; more so, 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 of being in possession of Ganja in commercial quantity and in the absence of any reasonable ground for believing that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail and also the criminal antecedent of the petitioner 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:- 20.08.2026 Saroj/