HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8556 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.226 of 2026, under Sections 3/5A/8 of Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of The Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals Act and Sections 109(1), 190, 3(5) of the BNS, P.S.- Piparich, District- Gorkhpur with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above- mentioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant was not named in the FIR. A Pik-Up vehicle was detained by the police supposedly transporting bulls for the purpose of slaughter and three alive bulls and one dead bull were recovered from the said Pik-Up vehicle. None of the co-accused were apprehended on the spot. The name of the applicant was disclosed during investigation. No one was arrested on the spot. No instrument which could be used for the purpose of slaughter was recovered from the Pik-Up vehicle in question. Co-accused Sahab Ansari, Rojid Ansari, Sunil Yadav, Dharmendra Prasad and Janardan Kanojia have been granted regular bail by this Court. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. 4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but could not dispute the factual submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Suprabha Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sudhir Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on the record. 6. The applicant is not named in the FIR. The applicant's name has surfaced during investigation. Similarly situated co-accused Sahab Ansari, Rojid Ansari, Sunil Yadav, Dharmendra Prasad and Janardan Kanojia have been granted regular bail by this Court. Applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant is not stated to be the owner of the Pik-Up vehicle which was supposedly transporting the livestock. The two motorcycles that were also detained by the police do not belong to the applicant. 7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to enlarge the 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 Sudhir Yadav, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety each 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; 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 NABAIL No. 8556 of 2026 2 considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. September 8, 2026 Sachin NABAIL No. 8556 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad