MOHD. TAHIR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER
NABAIL/407/2025 · 2025-05-05
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 138046 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 138046 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25768 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 407 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Tahir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 1. 1A. In view of order being passed in this petition, notices to opposite party no.2 stand dispensed with.
2. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.0190 of 2025, under Section 3/5A/8 U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 10 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, registered at Police Station Para, District Lucknow.
3. As per contents of first information report, the incident is said to have taken on 09.03.2025 when a police team upon information being received of an abandoned truck bearing no.U.P.44T4313 intercepted the same and found live cattle. Applicant is named as the owner of truck.
4. It has been submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in charges levelled against him which would be evident from fact that in the entire narration in FIR, there is no allegation of any efforts being made for slaughter of the live cattle which were recovered. It is submitted that applicant even otherwise was unaware with regard to transportation of the cattle. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history and is cooperating in the process of investigation.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed anticipatory bail but does not dispute the fact that investigation is still ongoing and applicant is cooperating in the same.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by
learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that applicant has been nominated in the FIR only on the basis of being owner of the vehicle in which live cattle was allegedly being transported. There does not appear to be any allegation in the FIR of efforts being made to slaughter the cattle. Applicant admittedly does not have any previous criminal history. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant interim anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNSS.
7. In view of above, it is provided that till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C./193 BNSS in the event of arrest, applicant Mohd. Tahir shall be released on anticipatory bail in aforesaid Case Crime number on his/her 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:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation; (ii) That the accused-applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without the 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 order.
8. The application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench