IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1493 of 2025 ------ Tinku Khan @ Md. Arif Khan, aged about 44 years, S/o Md. Rauf Khan, R/o Village –Barkatha Market, P.O. & P.S. – Barkatha, District –Hazaribag (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 05.03.2025 Heard the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No.71 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 11(1)(a)/11(1)(d) of Prohibition of Animal Cruelty Act and under Section 12(1) of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in transportation of bovine animals for slaughtering them illegally. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner is neither the owner of the vehicle nor the owner of the bovine animals which were loaded inside the vehicle. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only because of his six previous criminal antecedents. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is a hardened criminal habitually involved in transportation of bovine animals for slaughtering them illegally. It is next submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case to find out the chain of supply of bovine animals taken for slaughtering them illegally. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner and the requirement of his custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case as well as his criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to give the privileges of anticipatory bail to the above-named petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above-named petitioner is rejected. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu/Gunjan-