[2026:JHHC:12211] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.3423 of 2026 ------ Anirudh Sah @ Hit Sah, aged about 47 years, S/o Late Sriram Sah Vipat Ganjhu R/o Nehru Co operative Colony PO- Sector 12 PS- Sector 12 Dist- Bokaro (Jharkhand). ... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Awanish Ranjan Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashishta, Addl.P.P ------ Order No.02 Dated- 24-04-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bokaro Balidih P.5. Case No. 284 of 2025 corresponding to NDPS Case No. 09 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B)/ 21(a)/22(b)/27/29 of the NDPS Act, 1985. This is the second journey of the petitioner with the prayer for regular bail, earlier the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected on merits vide order dated 29.01.2026 in B.A. No.11381 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fresh ground is that the co-accused persons have been granted bail by this court as well as by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.04.2026 in B.A. No. 11802 of 2025 and vide order dated 18.03.2026 in B.A. No. 1482 of 2026. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co- operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for a considerable period of time. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. Learned AddI.P.P. on the hand vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has been in custody for some more time cannot be a valid ground to reconsider the regular bail of the petitioner; as the bail granted to the other co-accused persons stands on different footing than that of the present petitioner. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the fact that the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected on merit, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail at this stage; on the sole ground that the petitioner has remained in custody for some more time. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage for same reasons as mentioned in B.A. No.11381 order dated 29.01.2026. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 24/04/2026 Amar/