SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S 2026:UHC:2423 BA1 No. 524 of 2026 Jameel Ahmad ....Applicant Vs. State of Uttarakhand ......Respondent Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant—Jameel Ahmad, aged about 46 years, S/o Khalil Ahmad, R/o Mohalla Firdosiyan, Ward No. 06, Near Kurasiyan Marriage Hall, Thakurdwara, P.S. Thakurdwara, District Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh. The Applicant is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 87 of 2026, registered at Police Station Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 3/5/6/11(1) of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007. 4. Heard Mr. Shariq Khurshid, learned counsel for the Applicant and Mr. S.S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Vikash Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State. The record has been perused. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the alleged recovery was made only in the presence of police officials and no independent public witness was associated, thereby rendering the recovery doubtful. It is further submitted that no FSL report is on record to confirm that the seized meat is cow meat, and there is no evidence to establish that any cow or bull was slaughtered. The Applicant is stated to be in custody since 07.03.2026. It is also submitted that co-accused persons, namely Mohd. Arman, Faeem and Waseem, having similar roles, have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.04.2026, and thus, the present case stands on parity. 6. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application on the ground that the Applicant has a criminal history. In response, learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the said criminal history pertains to cases of a similar nature registered in District Bijnor. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, and considering the fact that the case of the Applicant stands on parity with the co-accused who have already been granted bail, this Court is of the view that sufficient grounds for grant of bail are made out at this stage. Accordingly, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Bail Application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant be released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. 9. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 07.04.2026 Shiksha