[2026:JHHC:29184] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.9018 of 2026 ------ Jitendra Kumar Yadav, aged about 23 years, Son of Naresh Yadav, resident of Vill. Nagad, P.O. & P.S.- Manatu, District- Palamu, Jharkhand- 822123. .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhanshu Shekhar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ajay Kr. Pathak, Addl.P.P. ------ Order No:-02 Dated:-29-09-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No. 280 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 17(c), 18(b), 22(c) & 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with the co-accused persons involved in sale and purchase of opium and 2.690 Kg. of opium was recovered from the possession of the co-accused namely Surendra Kumar Singh and Manoj Kumar Singh and the seized quantity of opium comes under commercial quantity. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that it has been mentioned in F.I.R. itself that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and the petitioner has also no criminal antecedents as mentioned in para 30 of the instant bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 30.07.2026 as mentioned in para-30 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 vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was coming together with the co-accused persons and the petitioner and the co-accused persons are directly associated with the seized opium which comes under commercial quantity hence, 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 her 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:- 29.09.2026 Amar/