[2026:JHHC:10879] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3005 of 2026 ------ Ramesh Kumar, aged about 26 years, son of Mohan Ram, resident of village Lookhom Ka Nada, Post Lohrwa Tehsil, Police Station Gudamalani, District Barmer, Rajasthan .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated-16-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with NDPS Case No. 16 of 2025 corresponding to Charhi P.S. Case No. 119 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 15, 22 of the NDPS Act. This is the third journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail. Earlier, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 02.04.2025 passed in B.A. No. 2577 of 2025 and the subsequent bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 21.11.2025 passed in B.A. No. 9573 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that in the meanwhile, six witnesses have been examined in this case and the petitioner has remained in custody for some more time. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.12.2024 as mentioned in para-16 of the instant bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with 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 keeping in view the direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner of transporting Doda in commercial quantity i.e. 606.03 Kg, the rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act is attracted in this case and in the absence of any material to be satisfied that there are 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 direct allegation of serious nature against the petitioner and in the absence of any reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner is guilty of the offence or that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail as well as the chance of his absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the bail of the above named petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Dated:- 16.04.2026 Saroj/