Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43463 (CHH)

NADEEM KURAISHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/7578/2025 · 2025-09-18

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:48358 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7578 of 2025 Nadeem Kuraishi S/o Asfaq Kuraishi, Aged About 33 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Beside Of Faijal Raja Madarasa, (Wrongly Mentioned Aa Haijalraja Madarasa), Talapara, Bilaspur, Police Station - Civil Line, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station - Akaltara, District - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Paras Mani Shrivas, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19/09/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 217/2023 registered at Police Station Akaltara, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act 2004 and Section 11 (d) of Preservation of Cruelty to Animals Act. KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.04.2023, the police officer's of the Police Station Akaltara were on search duty meanwhile came near the Vehicle TATA LPT 2518 No. PB-13-BL- 7394 and during the course of searching 28 Cattle's found inside the said vehicles out of which 6 had died. Thereafter, F.I.R. has been lodged against driver, owner of the aforementioned vehicles including the applicant also under Section 6, 10 of Chhattisgarh Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act 2004 and Section 11 (d) of Prevention of Animals from Cruelty Act and during the course of investigation, the applicant has been arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that, prima facie, no case is made out against him. It is further submitted that the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. The applicant has only one previous antecedent of a similar nature, and even in the present matter, he has been falsely roped in by the prosecution authorities. It is further contended that during the course of the alleged incident, not a single cattle was seized from the possession of the applicant, and his implication rests solely on the basis of the statement of co-accused persons. It is also submitted that the applicant’s container was being driven by one Aftab Kuraishi, who misused the said container for illegal purposes without the knowledge of the applicant. Thus, no offence can be said to have been made out against the applicant. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there are serious allegations against the applicant/accused of transporting cattle in his own vehicle in a cruel and torturous manner by stuffing them for the purpose of slaughter. It is further submitted that the case diary and the material collected during investigation clearly demonstrate the involvement of the applicant in the aforesaid illegal act and further the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent for similar nature as such, he is a habitual offender, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 24.05.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has only previous criminal antecedent for similar nature which has already been explained in the bail application of para No.4(A) and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. 7. Let the applicant –Nadeem Kuraishi, involved in Crime No. 217/2023 registered at Police Station Akaltara, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act 2004 and Section 11 (d) of Preservation of Cruelty to Animals Act, be 4 released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion 5 of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal