Md. Sufiyan Ansari @ Sufiyan v. The State of Jharkhand

: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner For the State : Mr. Shailendra Jit, Advocate. : Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu , A.P.P ------ ------ Order No.05 Dated- 09-07-2026 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Katkamsandi (P) P.S. Case No. 09 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 18(c), 27(b)(ii) of Drugs & Cosmetics Act 1940 & Section 8 (c), 22(b) of the NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was selling and purchasing banned intoxicating substance, altogether 15 bottles of WIN CIRFX syrup containing 100ml/- each and having codeine as one of the component, was recovered in connection with this case; out of which, 08 bottles have been recovered from the petitioner decides 45 pieces of Nitrazepam Tablets and from the co-accused –Md. Nadeem, 07 bottles of WIN CIRFX syrup and 30 pieces of Nitrazepam Tablets was also recovered. It is next submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will co-operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the informant or witnesses of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents as mentioned in para 13 and he has been in custody since

16.01.2026 as mentioned in para-15 of the instant bail application though, charge-sheet has been submitted. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail. The learned A.P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that keeping in view the recovery of psychotropic substance in commercial quantity, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS is attracted in this case and in absence of any material to be satisfied that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, as also the fact that there is every chance of the petitioner absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail; the petitioner ought not be released on bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and in the absence of any material to show any reasonable ground to believe that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail and the chance of the petitioner absconding or tampering with evidence, if released on bail, this Court is not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 09/07/2026 Amar/