Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69147 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1483 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahul Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mamta Tiwari,Rajesh Yadav,Vivek Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 2. This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 0345 of 2024, under Sections 3/5A/8/5B of U.P. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station - Ali Nagar, District- Chandauli, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Pawan Kumar, Vishal Rajbhar and Jai Prakash Gupta in police custody. The said statements, insofar as they implicate the applicant, are unreliable. The applicant has no concern with the alleged vehicle. The alleged vehicle, from which the livestock were recovered, does not belong to the applicant. Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant, and the fact that the name of the applicant was disclosed by co-accused Pawan Kumar, Vishal Rajbhar and Jai Prakash Gupta in police custody; there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery; at this stage there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence; charge sheet has been filed, the applicant had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. 6. In the event of arrest, the applicant Rahul Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned; (ii) the 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court; (iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court. 7. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 8. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 Manish Kr Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad