Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 202742 (ALL)

KAMAL @ KAMAL QURESHI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER

NABAIL/1585/2025 · 2025-10-28

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1585 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR, No.0274/2025, Under Sections: 3/5/8 U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, Police Station- Baldirai, District Sultanpur. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant’s name has surfaced only in the confessional statement of a co-accused recorded during police custody. Except for this statement, there is no other material evidence in the prosecution case. There are no eyewitnesses to the alleged incident, nor has any dead animal been recovered. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated merely on account of his criminal history consisting of four cases. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that if the accused is granted anticipatory bail, he undertakes to comply with all conditions imposed by the Court. He shall fully cooperate with the investigation and shall not misuse the liberty granted to him. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. Upon a prima facie perusal of the record, it appears that apart from the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kamal @ Kamal Qureshi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no other material collected by the prosecution. Considering that the alleged offence is triable by a Magistrate and in view of the undertaking given on behalf of the applicant to cooperate with the investigation, I am of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be released on anticipatory bail in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to his continued cooperation in the investigation. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant 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:- The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He 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. The application is allowed. October 28, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1585 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench