IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 217 CRM-M-52596-2025 Date of decision: 23.09.2025 HIMANSHU ......Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ ***** Present: - Mr. Surinder Kumar Daaria, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Chhavi Sharma, Asstt. A.G. Haryana. ***** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral) The instant first petition is for seeking concession of regular bail in case bearing FIR No. 46 dated 10.02.2025 registered under Sections 3/5/6/13(1)(2) and 17 of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan & Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 at Police Station P.S. Sadar Narwana, District Jind. 2. The case of the prosecution, stated briefly, is that on 10.02.2025, during routine checking, a CNG Pick-Up vehicle bearing registration No. DL 1LAN-5992 was intercepted by ASI Balwan Singh along with other police personnel. Upon inspection, the vehicle was found to be carrying three cows and one calf in a cruel and inhumane condition, the animals having been tied with ropes. The vehicle was being driven by the VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.24 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-52596-2025 -2- present applicant, Himanshu, while his co-accused, Imran had occupied the passenger seat. Neither of the accused was able to produce any document establishing ownership of the animals or authorisation for their transportation. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that as per the allegations set out by the prosecution, the petitioner was driving the vehicle in which the cattles were being transferred. The said vehicle belongs to father-in-law of the co-accused Imran. It is contended that the petitioner is not a previous convict and has already undergone an actual custody of nearly 07 months. He further submits that no prosecution witness has been examined so far. 4. Counsel for the respondent-State does not dispute the same. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. 6. In view of the facts noticed above and taking into consideration that the petitioner is not a previous convict, the period of custody undergone by the petitioner and bearing in mind that no prosecution witness has been examined so far, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. 7. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail bond/surety bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.24 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-52596-2025 -3- 8. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not extend any threat and shall not influence any prosecution witnesses in any manner directly or indirectly. 9. The observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of available material. (VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) SEPTEMBER 23, 2025 JUDGE Vishal Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No VISHAL SHARMA 2025.09.24 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document