39254 NAFR Ilfaj Ansari S/o Husain Aged About 45 Years R/o Vijaynagar,out Post v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Out Post - Vijaynagar Police Station - Ramanujganj, District
Case Details
1 KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6176 of 2025 2025:CGHC:39254 NAFR Ilfaj Ansari S/o Husain Aged About 45 Years R/o Vijaynagar,out Post - Vijaynagar Police Station - Ramanujganj, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Out Post - Vijaynagar Police Station - Ramanujganj, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) MCRC No. 6216 of 2025 Ilfaj Ansari S/o Husain Aged About 45 Years R/o Vijaynagar, Outpost- Vijaynagar Police Station Ramanujganj District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Out Post- Vijaynagar, Police Station- Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 06.08.2025 Order on Board 1. Since the above two bail applications are arising out of same incidents registered at same police station and also the applicant is same in above two bail applications but their crime numbers are different, they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.101/2025 and Crime No.63/2025 respectively, registered at Police Station Out Post- Vijaynagar, Police Station- Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 6, 10 of the C.G. Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the Police received some secret information that during 25.06.2025 to 26.06.2025 at night some cattle smugglers were buying cows and bulls and were taking them towards Jharkhand for slaughter, on receiving information, a raid was conducted but taking advantage of darkness of night and forest and rain, the accused ran away from the spot. Thereafter, the accused was identified by the villagers and on the basis of suspicion, the present applicant was arrested and the basis of his memorandum, crime was registered against the applicant. Hence these bail applications. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is 3 being falsely implicated in the aforementioned offence, as the applicant did not commit any crime and was not arrested from the spot, but rather was falsely implicated by the police in this case. The applicant has no connection with the aforementioned crime and was arrested based on doubt, with no material evidence showing his involvement in the case. Notably, the police registered another crime on the same day at the same police station, alleging the applicant was taking over 100 cattle towards Jharkhand, which demonstrates malafide intention on the part of the police, as it is impossible for one person to be in two places at once and also not feasible for one man to take such a large number of cattle alone. This clearly indicates a false case has been fabricated against the applicant. Furthermore, the applicant is the sole earning member of the family, and his incarceration will lead to financial instability and starvation for the entire family. Additionally, upon examining the facts of the case, it appears that the offences under Section 4, 6, and 10 of the CG Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act are not made out against the present applicant. So far criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the applicant has one more case with Crime No.35/2025 pending against him, with same offences registered in same police station as mentioned in the present case and the same allegations has been alleged in the present case. Lastly, the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail 4 application and submits that the accused, Ilfaz Ansari, has been implicated in two serious cases under the Chhattisgarh Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act. In the first case, he is accused of transporting 110 cattle to a slaughterhouse in Dumri, Jharkhand, while mercilessly beating them with a stick. Despite being allegedly caught red-handed, he was arrested much later on 26.06.2025. In a second case (Crime Number 101/2025), he is accused of driving 10 cows, calves, heifers, and bulls to a slaughterhouse with similar brutality, and was arrested on the night of 25.06.2025-26.06.2025. Given the gravity of these offences and the fact that the police report indicates his involvement in other similar crimes, granting bail would not be in the interest of justice. Hence his bail applications are liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that no material evidence is available showing the involvement of the applicant in the case and the applicant has been arrested on the basis of doubt and further, the police registered another crime on the same day at the same police station, alleging the applicant was taking over 100 cattle towards Jharkhand, which demonstrates malafide intention on the part of the police, as it is impossible for one person to be in two places at once and further, the applicant is in jail since 26.06.2025, and the conclusion of the 5 trial is likely to take some time, therefore, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 8. Let applicant, Ilfaj Ansari, involved in Crime No.101/2025 and Crime No.63/2025 respectively, registered at Police Station Out Post- Vijaynagar, Police Station- Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 6, 10 of the C.G. Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in each case in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial 6 court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Kunal Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice