[ 2026:JHHC:27402] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4562 of 2026 Minhajul Ansari @ Minhaj, Aged about 34 years, son of Fazal Miyan, Resident of Village Prem Nagar, P.O.& P.S.- Hazaribagh, District- Hazaribagh, Jharkhand. ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, Advocate. : Mr. Harsh Chandra, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Vishwanath Roy, A.P.P. ------ 03/ 11.09.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Charhi P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 317(5) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 15(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, pending in the court of learned District and Sessions judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, Hazaribagh. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of confessional statement. He next submits that 201.01 Kgs. of doda (opium), which is commercial in quantity has been recovered from the truck and the driver of the said truck has taken the name of this petitioner. He further submits that the said truck driver has stated that this petitioner used to manage the passing of the truck across the road. He then submits that apart from that there is no allegation against this petitioner. He also submits that this petitioner is having two criminal antecedents of different nature. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail [ 2026:JHHC:27402] -2- may kindly be provided to the petitioner. 4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioner was indulged in managing and passing of the truck in question. He next submits that the recovered doda is commercial quantity and the driver of the truck in question has taken the name of this petitioner stating that this petitioner used to do so and further petitioner is having three criminal antecedents. He further submits that mobile tower location of this petitioner was found to be the place of occurrence and that has come in para-63 of the supplementary case diary. He also submits that it has come in the case diary that Rs. 49,000/- has been transferred by the owner of the truck in the account of the co-accused. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected. 5. Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, learned counsel in reply submits that the said commercial quantity cannot be fastened upon the petitioner as the recovery has been made from the driver. He next submits that however, it has been stated that the petitioner was indulged in retail sell and the quantity is not disclosed. 6. On perusal of the FIR, it transpires that the said truck has started from Khunti (Jharkhand) and was going to Pathankot (Punjab). From the possession of the driver 201.01 kgs of doda (opium) has been recovered and the said driver has stated that this petitioner has used to manage the passing of the truck in the transition. In para-52 of the case diary, it has come that Rs. 49,000/- has been transferred in the account of the co-accused by the truck owner of the said truck. Further in para 63 of the supplementary case diary, it has come that the mobile tower location of this petitioner was found nearby the place of occurrence. [ 2026:JHHC:27402] -3- There are parameters of granting regular bail or anticipatory bail arising out of the NDPS Act. 7. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-11.09.2026 Amitesh/-