2025:UHC:2091 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/422/2025 Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J. 1. Mr. Zafar Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddharath Bisht, learned Assistant Government Advocate with Mr. Himanshu Sain, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Present applicant is praying for regular bail in relation to FIR dated 18.01.2025 bearing FIR No. 0010 of 2025, registered at Police Station – Pulbattat, District – Udham Singh Nagar wherein present applicant has been implicated for the offences punishable under Section 3, 5, 11 (i) of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007. 4. On the previous date, State was directed to get the instructions what action has been taken on the complaint made by the applicant’s brother. Written instructions are placed before this Court and on perusal of the written instructions, it appears that complaint was found to be baseless. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated by the police, which is evident from the fact that earlier, applicant’s brother has submitted a complaint to the DIG, Police, Nainital on 25.03.2022 wherein he raised certain allegations against the members of SOG and requested that investigation be handed over to some honest police officers. Not only this, even after lodging of this FIR, brother of present applicant has also made a complaint on 04.03.2025 wherein he raised certain allegation against the police officials. He further submits that applicant has also moved an application for the Narco test of the concerned police officials and for getting the mobile CDR details of the police officials. 6. Apart from this, learned counsel for the applicant submits that other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by the trial court. 7. Per contra, learned AGA for the State submits that applicant has previous criminal history of the 7 cases of the same nature and in two cases, applicant has already been convicted and in remaining five cases, he is on bail. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties 2025:UHC:2091 and further taking into consideration the fact that other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail therefore, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves for bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant “Shakil” be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 10. It is made clear that if the applicant after being released is found to be indulged in any such activity, the prosecution is free to move bail cancellation application without any delay. (Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 24.03.2025 SKS