Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13778 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1633 of 2025 Applicant :- Raj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 63 of 2024, under Sections 3/5A/5B/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act readwith 11 Cruelty to Animal Act, Police Station Naugarh, District Chandauli, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. FIR of the present case was lodged against four unknown persons and according to the FIR when after receiving information police arrived at spot then from the spot 53 cattle were recovered. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that nobody was named in the FIR but during investigation through the statement of co-accused, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 5. He further submitted that admittedly, the alleged recovered cattle did not recover from the possession of applicant. 6. He further submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is however, having criminal history of one another case but his criminal history has been explained in the instant bail application and in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 19.8.2024 i.e. for last more than five months. 7. Per contra, learned AGA, however, opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases of Cow Slaughter Act but could not dispute other arguments on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, it reflects that apart from the present case, applicant is having criminal history of two other cases of Cow Slaughter Act but his criminal antecedent of one case has been explained in the affidavit filed in support to the instant bail application and admittedly, nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession and it appears, applicant has been made accused in the present matter through the statement of co-accused during investigation. 10. Further, in the present matter, applicant is in jail since 19.8.2024 i.e. for last more than five months. 11. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 12. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 13. Let the applicant-Raj Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 14. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 15. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 27.1.2025/Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad