Allowed

Sayed Samir @ Sayad Samir v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Sept 2026B.A./8597/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to Sayed Samir, accused of supplying brown sugar (heroin) under the NDPS Act, upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 and two sureties of equal amount, subject to conditions regarding cooperation and witness integrity.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail upon furnishing Rs. 25,000 bond with two sureties of like amount; conditions of cooperation and non-disturbance of witnesses imposed.

Sayed Samir @ Sayad Samir Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

( 2026:JHHC:27875 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8597 of 2026

¶2

Sayed Samir @ Sayad Samir, aged about 32 years, S/o –Muna Warsi, R/o Village –Konge Jaipur, Ghora Maidan, P.O. & P.S.-Kanke, District –Ranchi, Jharkhand.

¶3

------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, Addl. P.P.

¶6

------

¶7

Order No.02 Dated- 15.09.2026

¶8

Heard the parties.

¶9

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Bariatu P.S. Case No.287 of 2025(N), corresponding to NDPS Case No. 21 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under sections 21(b) of the NDPS Act.

¶10

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the supplier of brown sugar weighing 10.925 gram which is also known as heroin to the co-accused. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and alleged seized brown sugar comes under intermediate quantity. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 09.01.2026, as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 01 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶11

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above-named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be

¶13

released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in connection with Bariatu P.S. Case No.287 of 2025(N), corresponding to NDPS Case No. 21 of 2026 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.

¶14

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶15

15.09.2026 Sonu/

Sayed Samir @ Sayad Samir v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayed Samir @ Sayad Samir v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases