(2026:JHHC:495 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 11376 of 2025 Prabhat Singh, aged about 44 years, S/o late Ram Janam Singh, resident of village- Ranik, P.O. Bela, P.S.- Chauparan, District- Hazaribagh (Jharkhand) … … Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand and Ors. … … Opposite Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhirendra Kr. Deo, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. P. D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P. --- 03/19.02.2026 Heard Mr. Dhirendra Kr. Deo, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr. P. D. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party- State of Jharkhand. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 17.10.2025 in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No.44(B) of 2023, arising out Saiko P.S. Case No.20 of 2023, registered under Section 15(c)/25 of the N.D.P.S. Act, now pending in the court of learned Special Judge (NDPS), Khunti. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 21.07.2023, the police intercepted two vehicles Mahindra Pick-up and Tata Truck and seized about 2630 kgs. of poppy husk on the said vehicles. He submits that the petitioner is neither the owner of the truck nor there any seizure from the petitioner and his name has come in the confessional statement of Vakil Saw, who has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.12.2025 passed in B.A. No.9107 of 2025 and another co-accused namely Tinku Kumar has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 10.03.2025 in B.A. No.449 of 2025. 5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has as many as 14 criminal antecedents of similar nature. He has also submitted that the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail. 6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted 2 that chargesheet has been submitted in this case and out of 14 criminal antecedents, the petitioner has been acquitted in four cases and granted bail in four cases. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of offence and criminal antecedents against the petitioner, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. 8. However, the State is directed to ensure prompt production of witness before the court. 9. The learned counsel of the State is directed to forward a copy of this order to the concerned authority for compliance. 10. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:19.02.2026 Jay/- Date of Uploading:19.02.2026