Dismissed¶¶16

Pramod Singh Bhogta v. the State of Jharkhand

Bail – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act

Jharkhand HC6 Apr 2026B.A./69/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; B.A. No.69 of 2026; Pramod Singh Bhogta v. The State of Jharkhand; bail application rejected; NDPS Act Ss. 15(c), 18(b), 22, 25, 27, 29; S. 37 NDPS rigors; commercial quantity Ganja 78 Kg; BNS 2023 S. 111(4); Bariyatu P.S. Case No.42 of 2025; custody since 06.09.2025; co-accused bail contrast (B.A. No.11322 of 2025, order dated 19.02.2026); Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.; order dated 06.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

The Court considered the serious nature of the allegation of the petitioner's involvement in illegal transportation of Narcotic Substances, i.e., Ganja of 78 Kg (a commercial quantity), as weighing against release on bail. ¶¶16

Pramod Singh Bhogta Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:JHHC:9546] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.69 of 2026

¶2

------

¶3

Pramod Singh Bhogta aged about 25 years son of Karam Ganjhu, resident of vill- Kalyanpur, P.O. + P.S.- Lawalong, Dist- Chatra

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Opposite Party

¶7

------

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the State : Ms. Lily Sahay, Addl.P.P ------

¶10

Order No.04 Dated-06-04-2026

¶11

Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bariyatu P.S. Case No.42 of 2025 registered under Sections 111 (4) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 15 (c), 18 (b), 22, 27, 25, 29 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in illegal transportation of Narcotic Substances i.e., Ganja of 78 Kg, which comes under commercial quantity. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the co-accused persons, with similar allegations, have already been admitted to bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide the common order dated 19.02.2026 passed in B.A. No.11322 of 2025 along with other allied cases. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.09.2025. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

¶14

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that keeping in view the fact that the seized quantity of Ganja comes under commercial quantity, the rigors of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, 1985 is attracted in this case and in the absence of any material to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence alleged and that there is no chance of his being not involved in any offence while on bail, hence, there is every chance of the petitioner absconding and tampering with the evidence if

¶15

released on bail. It is further submitted that the co-accused, who have been admitted to bail by different co-ordinate Benches of this Court, were stated to be involved in transportation of Poppy straw of less than commercial quantity and without recording any finding in terms of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act, they have been admitted to bail. It is, therefore, submitted that the petitioner ought not be released on bail at this stage.

¶16

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of being involved in illegal transportation of Narcotic Substances i.e., Ganja of 78 Kg and in the absence of any material to suggest that the petitioner is not guilty of the allegations and that there is no chance of his being not committing any offence while on bail as well as his chance of absconding and tampering with the evidence, if released on bail, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above-named petitioner be released on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected at this stage.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Dated-06.04.2026-Animesh/

Pramod Singh Bhogta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Singh Bhogta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Guddu Ray Alias Guddu Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arun Kumar Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Md. Waris Alias Waris Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shamim Akhtar @ MD Shamim Akhtar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suman Tirkey Vs State of Jharkhand

Suman Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand