HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 805 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Syed Ahmad Mehdi, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Vikram Singh Chauhan, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail by means of the following order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court on 03.07.2025: "Heard learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/F.I.R No.115/2025, under Sections 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act & Section 11 Animal Cruelty Act and Section 207 of Motor Vehicle Act , P.S. Akhand Nagar, District Sultanpur. In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 12.05.2025 while the sub-inspector Vinod Kumar Patel along with police party were busy in checking, they received information from the secret informer that truck No.UP 54 T 7148 is being driven towards Purvanchal Express-way loaded with number of cow progenies. Believing this information, the truck was apprehended. From the truck 12 cow progenies were found. Out of that nine cows and three bulls were recovered. It is further alleged that two persons fled from the back of the truck by jumping they were Akmal and Enul. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no recovery from the applicant. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecution version is highly doubtful and improbable as the police has lodged an F.I.R. and under no circumstance police on its own could have given the name of the persons/accused persons who have fled from the truck. The name of the applicant and the co-accused has not come neither in the F.I.R. nor in the statement of any co-accused person or any witness. This is a clear case of false implication. It has been further submitted by Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Ahmad Mehdi, Saniya Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Enul .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) learned counsel for the applicant that even the secret informer has not disclosed the name of the accused persons to the complainant. The applicant has explained the criminal history of one case in the bail application. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that applicant will cooperate in the investigation. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the anticipatory bail application however, could not respond as to how the name of accused persons, who were not caught on the spot, could have been mentioned in the F.I.R. He prays for and is allowed 15 days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 29.07.2025. Considering the above aspect of the matter, perusal of the record as well as the peculiar facts of this case and considering the fact that applicant has explained the criminal history of one case in the bail application, investigation is going on, undertaking given by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant will cooperate in the investigation as also the judgment of Apex Court passed in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant. As an interim protection, it is provided that applicant-Enul shall appear before the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned within two weeks from today and shall be released on interim anticipatory bail by the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned on furnishing adequate bonds and security with the following conditions:- The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection." 3. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of the charge sheet dated 06.08.2025. 4. The learned A.G.A. could not point out any misuse of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. The investigation already stands concluded. 5. It appears that the applicant has cooperated with the investigation and therefore it could be completed and a charge sheet has been filed. No material has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view different from the one taken by the coordinate Bench. 6. In view of above, the interim order dated 03.07.2025 is made absolute and the NABAIL No. 805 of 2025 2 anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order. 7. The applicant shall appear before learned trial court and submit a personal bond and two sureties within a period of 15 days from today. September 19, 2025 Ram. NABAIL No. 805 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench