Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3324 (JHR)

RUPAN GANJHU @ RUPLAL KUMAR GANJHU v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

B.A./2683/2026 · 2026-04-02

Deepak Roshan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:9339 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2683 of 2026 --------- Rupan Ganjhu @ Ruplal Kumar Ganjhu, aged about 20 years, son of Sahdeo Ganjhu, resident of village Hosir, P.O. & P.S. Lawalong, Dist. Chatra. ....Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ....Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedy, Advocate Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, A.P.P. --------- 02/ 02.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant bail application has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with NDPS Case No. 11 of 2025 arising out of Lawalong P.S. Case No. 18/2024 for the offences registered under Sections 18, 27, and 29 of the NDPS Act, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Cases, Chatra. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the FIR it was alleged that 5.800 kgs of opium was recovered from the house of the petitioner. However, there is no signature of any family members of the petitioner on the seizure list which creates doubt about recovery of the alleged opium from the house of the petitioner. Further, the seizure witnesses are the members of raiding party, which is also against the rules of NDPS Rules, 2022. He further submits that petitioner is languishing in custody since 03.10.2024; as such, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by every condition imposed by this court. 4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner. 5. Looking to the fact that seized article comes under commercial quantity, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail at this stage. 2026:JHHC:9339 2 However, since the petitioner is in custody since 03.10.2024, the learned Trial Court is requested to expedite the matter and conclude the same at the earliest, preferably within a period of three months. 6. Accordingly, the instant application stands dismissed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 2nd April, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded on 04.04.2026