HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9878 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 187 of 2026, under Section 3/5/8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station- Nauhjhil, District Mathura, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that initially the FIR was lodged against the co-accused, Raja @ Rajuddin, under Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act. It is alleged that approximately 40-45 kilograms of cow meat was recovered from the possession of co-accused Raja @ Rajuddin. The Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that except the confessional statement of the co-accused Raja @ Rajuddin and the call detail records, which merely show that the applicant was in contact with Raja @ Rajuddin, there is no other direct evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. 4. The Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that the cow meat was recovered from the co-accused Raju @ Rajuddin. The applicant was in constant contact with the co-accused Raja @ Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Imran .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Rajuddin. The confession of the co-accused directly implicates the applicant in the alleged offence and he may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 6. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Except the confessional statement of the co-accused and call detail records, there is no other evidence against the applicant. The applicant is not stated to be the owner of the E-rickshaw in question from which the cow meat was supposedly recovered. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Imran, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; NABAIL No. 9878 of 2026 2 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 29, 2026 Junaid NABAIL No. 9878 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- JUNAID AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad