WAKEEL @ MOHAMMAD WAKEEL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/332/2025 · 2025-04-17
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134561 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 134561 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21599 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 332 of 2025 Applicant :- Wakeel @ Mohammad Wakeel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Shukla,Abhay Kumar Pandey,Durgesh Kumar Tiwari,Shiv Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party No.1. In view of
order being passed, notice to opposite party No.2 stands dispensed with.
2. The instant first anticipatory bail application has been moved by the applicant, in Case Crime No.18 of 2025, under Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, under Sections 5 ka/ 8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, Police Station- Gurubaksh Ganj, District- Raebareli, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.
3. As per contents of the F.I.R., the incident is said to have taken place on 21.01.2025 when during the course of patrolling, the police party chanced upon a DCM Container bearing No.UP33BT3225 with live cattle. It has been indicated that upon approaching the said vehicle, the persons traveling therein fled the scene.
4. It has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him, as would be evident from the fact that the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown persons and the applicant has been apprehended after 9 days of the incident only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of co-accused. It is submitted that there is no recovery of any cattle or any beef from the person of the applicant whose previous criminal history has already been explained in paragraph 11 of the affidavit filed in support of the application.
5. Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, opposed the
anticipatory bail application with the submission that the name of the applicant surfaced during the course of investigation on the confessional statement of co-accused.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by
learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, subject to further evidence being collected during investigation, it appears that the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown persons and applicant has been apprehended after 9 days of the incident without any recovery from his person; the involvement of the applicant is also alleged at the instance of confessional statement of the co-accused; previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph 11 of the affidavit filed in support of the application.
7. Thus, having regard to the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Nathu Singh v. State of U.P. and Others, 2021(6) SCC 64, MANU/SC/0360/2021, protection from arrest for limited period of time i.e. till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., may be granted in favour of the applicant.
8. In result, the anticipatory bail application moved by the applicant- Wakeel @ Mohammad Wakeel is finally disposed of with a direction that till the submission of police report under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C., in the event of arrest of applicant in the above-mentioned case, he shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer subject to the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. (ii) The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./ S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. (iii) The applicant shall not leave India without
previous permission of the Court. (iv) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this protection.
9. The application stands allowed.
Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench