Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2026 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Jharkhand/
  4. 2024/
  5. June

Ramchandra Paswan Alias Santosh Paswan vs. the State of Jharkhand

Decided on 28 June 2024• Citation: B.A./4368/2024• High Court of Jharkhand
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                    IN THE HIGH  COURT  OF JHARKHAND    AT  RANCHI                  
                              B.A. No. 4368 of 2024                                 
                 Ramchandra Paswan @ Santosh Paswan    ……  Petitioner               
                                   Versus                                           
                 The State of Jharkhand                ……Opposite party             
                                   ----------                                       
           CORAM:   HON'BLE  MR. JUSTICE  PRADEEP  KUMAR   SRIVASTAVA               
                                    -----                                           
                 For the Petitioner : Mr. Anupam Anand, Advocate                    
                                    Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate                      
                 For the State     : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P.                     
                                    …..                                             
          Order No.05/ Dated:28.06.2024                                             
                1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.                           
                2. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Kunda P.S.
                Case No. 02 of 2015 (NDPS Case No. 33 of 2022), registered for the offence
                under Section 8(c), 18, 20 & 22 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic
                Substances Act, 1985, pending in the court of learned Additional District &
                Session Judge-V, Chatra.                                            
                3. As per FIR, informant along with other police personnel after receiving
                secret information reached village Margada where they found opium crops
                on one acre of land. It is alleged that said opium plantations were done jointly
                by the accused persons. Thereafter, keeping five opium plants as sample,
                remaining were destroyed on the spot and the same were seized. Thereafter,
                in the East Canal, opium crop was found in ten Kattha land which was
                cultivated by Kariman Bharti, Deepak Bharti, Jageshwar Ganjhu and Basant
                Ganjhu. Further at two more places opium poppy plantations were found to
                have been done by other co-accused persons of the case about whom it is
                alleged that they were also found engaged in cultivation of opium plantations
                on the above land.                                                  
                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent
                and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. It is submitted that
                similarly situated Co-accused, namely Nemdhari Ganjhu person has been
                granted regular bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in B.A. No. 4025
                of 2018 vide order dated 02.08.2018 Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
                                           .                                        

                The petitioner is languishing in Judicial custody since 08.04.2024 without
                any rhymes and reasons. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the trial of the
                case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not
                indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or
                influencing the witnesses of prosecution, hence, the petitioner may be
                enlarged on bail.                                                   
                5.  Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of State as per direction has filed
                counter affidavit and has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
                submitted that there are sufficient materials against the petitioner showing his
                involvement in the present case, hence he does not deserve bail.    
                6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of
                the fact that other Co-accused person with similar allegation have been
                granted regular bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, I am inclined to
                release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is
                directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees
                Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction
                of learned Additional District & Session Judge-V, Chatra in connection with
                Kunda P.S. Case No. 02 of 2015 (NDPS Case No. 33 of 2022) subject to the
                conditions:-                                                        
                    (1)  Petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every
                    date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented
                    from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
                    (2)  Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till
                the conclusion of the trial.                                        
                    (3)  Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the         
                    prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses. 
                    In case of violation of the aforesaid condition the bail of the petitioner
                shall be cancelled and shall be taken into custody by the learned trial court
                itself.                                                             
                                             (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)         
             R.K/