TAMSEEL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/321/2025 · 2025-04-15
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134019 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134019 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21053 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 321 of 2025 Applicant :- Tamseel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party No.1-State and perused the record. Notice to opposite party No.2 stands dispensed with. This first bail application has been filed with regard to F.I.R. No. 47 of 2025 under Sections 3/5A/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act & Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act & 109/324 BNS, Police Station Jaisinghpur, District Sultanpur. As per contents of FIR, on 15th February, 2025 police team intercepted a vehicle bearing No. U.P. No. UP21CT8188 with live cattle. The F.I.R. has been filed against unknown persons. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him. It is submitted that there is no recovery from the applicant and the contents of F.I.R. even taken ex facie to be correct does not indicate that live cattle recovered were being taken for the purposes of slaughter due to which invoking cow slaughter Act itself becomes doubtful. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with submission that during course of investigation, it transpires that applicant is owner of the aforesaid vehicle and is avoiding cooperation during course of investigation. It is however admitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence collected during investigation, it appears that applicant was not apprehended from the spot nor was made any recovery from him. The F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons with being indicated as owner of the vehicle. The aspect of applicability of Cow Slaughter Act would
be subject matter of evidence during course of investigation. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Tamseel shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witnesses. (2) The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/1.O./S.H.O. concerned call (s) for investigation/interrogation. (3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (4) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this protection. 10. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 15.4.2025 prabhat Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench