HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9093 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. This is a second anticipatory bail application. The first anticipatory bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court with the liberty of filing a fresh application explaining in detail his criminal antecedents. The criminal antecedents of the applicant have been explained in Paragraph No. 28 of the affidavit as well as supplementary affidavit filed today in Court. The explanation given by the applicant with respect to his criminal antecedent of one case has not been disputed. 3. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 453 of 2026, under Section 3/8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station- Lohiyanagar, District Meerut, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. which was lodged against unknown persons. Three co-accused namely Yunus, Amir and Talib were arrested by the Police and from their possession no meat or carcass was recovered. The co-accused Yunus, Amir and Talib have been granted regular bail by this Court. The applicant's named has been mentioned during investigation in the statement of co-accused and also the police informer which is inadmissible in evidence. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhand Pratap Singh, Subham Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shadab .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, but does not dispute the factual submissions made by Learned counsel for the applicant. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on the record. 7. The co-accused Yunus, Amir and Talib have been granted regular bail by this Court. The FIR was lodged against unknown persons relating to recovery of some animal remains suspected to be of Cow or its progeny. Except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no other legally admissible evidence against the applicant. The applicant has a criminal history of one other case, which has been satisfactorily explained in the supplementary affidavit. In the prima facie opinion of the Court, the applicant is not likely to repeat the offence in near future. 8. 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. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 10. In the event of the arrest of the applicant -Shadab, 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; NABAIL No. 9093 of 2026 2 iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 12. 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 8, 2026 Sartaj NABAIL No. 9093 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SARTAJ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad