[2026:JHHC:28218] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7728 of 2026 ------ Sudesh Yadav, aged about 20 years, son of Jagdish Yadav, resident of Village – Giddhour, P.O. & P.S. – Giddhour, District - Chatra .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Sr. Advocate Mrs. Pragati Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kr. Shukla, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-03 Dated:-17-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Lohsinghna P.S. Case No. 07 of 2026 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 32 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 17(c), 18(b), 21(c), 29 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 transporting and selling opium and 20.5 kg of opium which comes under intermediate quantity, has been recovered from the petitioner. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that though the contraband was tested on D.D. Kit but there is no FSL Report to support that the seized contraband is opium. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 22.01.2026 as mentioned in para-01 of the instant bail application. 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 since the contraband has been tested in D.D. Kit, the FSL Report which is still awaited will not be a ground to relax the rigours of Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the N.D.P.S. Act; hence, in the absence of any material available in the record to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty and that he is not likely to commit any offence, while 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 that opium in commercial quantity has been recovered and seized from the petitioner by the police but in the absence of any material available in the record to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty and that he is not likely to commit any offence, while 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:-17.09.2026 Saroj/