High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 3873 of 2022 Applicant :- Hasnain And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary, Home Department And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Decision
It is informed by learned A.G.A. that complete case diary of the case is available. Thus, in the opinion of this Court, the anticipatory bail application moved on behalf of the applicants could be finally disposed of. Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present application has been moved by the accused- applicants- Hasnain and Israr in Case Crime No. 70 of 2022, under Sections 3, 5, 5A, 8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, Police Station Mundapandey, District Moradabad, with the prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as they are apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case. Learned counsel for the applicants while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution. It is further submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face, no penal offences may be attracted so far as the applicants are concerned. It is also submitted submitted that the story as stated in the F.I.R. lodged by Sub Inspector Rashid Akhtar on 07.04.2022 at 12:49 hours at Police Station Mundhapandey, District Moradabad is to the tune that at the relevant date and time, the police party was patrolling and where the informer has given the information of transportation of some prohibited animals and meat. It is further stated in the F.I.R. that the informer after indicating the accused Murslim, who was sitting in a vehicle, and some other persons, fled away from there and thereafter the police party is stated to have raided the vehicle, however, all the accused persons fled away from the scene and no body could be arrested, while from the vehicle Honda City, two prohibited animals were found tied up with ropes and other material used for slaughtering and flesh of cow progeny was recovered. The veterinary doctor after examining the prohibited flesh allegedly recovered from the vehicle opined that it is suspected to belong to cow and its progeny. Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted that the story as stated by the concerned Sub Inspector in the F.I.R. could not be believed on the score that after indicating only accused Murslim, who was allegedly sitting in the vehicle and some unknown persons surrounding him, the informer had gone from the scene of the crime and thereafter the police is stated to have raided the vehicle and all the accused persons including Murslim, who was sitting in the vehicle, fled away and therefore there was no occasion for any police personnel to have identified the instant applicants and other accused persons. It is further submitted that the incident as admitted by the prosecution is of mid night and no source of light has been disclosed in the F.I.R. The alleged offences against the applicants are triable by magistrate. Applicants are a respectable citizen of the locality and is having no criminal history. The investigating officer without there being any cogent and reliable material/evidence is making all out efforts to apprehend/arrest the applicants and there is no apprehension that after being granted facility of anticipatory bail, applicants may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. They undertakes that they are ready to cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial as and when required and thus, protection from arrest be granted to them. It is next submitted that co-accused person of the alleged crime namely Islam has already been granted the facility of anticipatory bail vide order dated 09.05.2022 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 3891 of 2022. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the applicants is involved in a heinous offence and therefore, they are not entitled for any protection. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record and keeping in view the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. : MANU/SC/1021/2010, Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors. : MANU/SC/0100/2020 and Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Ors. v. State of Punjab : MANU/SC/0215/1980 : 1980 (2) SCC 565, wherein the Supreme Court has elaborately discussed the circumstances, wherein powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. could be exercised and the law propounded by Hon'ble Supreme Court right from Joginder Kumar vs State Of U.P : 1994 AIR 1349, 1994 SCC (4) 260 and Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273, wherein it has been emphasized that merely because the investigating officer is having power to arrest, the arrest could not be justified unless he is having valid reason for making arrest, it is evident that the incident of the instant case is admittedly of night and no source of light has been disclosed and the veterinary doctor, who has inspected/analyzed the meat is not sure that it belongs to cow and its progeny and none has identified applicant and other co- accused persons except co-accused Murslim, who was identified and indicated so by the informer without discussing merits of the case as the same may affect the fate of the investigation and trial, suffice is to say, that it is a fit case wherein applicants may be provided protection from arrest. It is vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that co-accused person namely Islam has also been granted the facility of anticipatory bail. Thus having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application is finally disposed of in terms that till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent court in the event of arrest of the applicants- Hasnain and Israr, involved in aforesaid case crime number shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties (one of the sureties will be of family members) each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:- (1) The applicants shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer/investigating officer as and when required and will cooperate in investigation; (2) The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court. (4) The applicants shall deposit his passport with the trial court and if he has not been issued any passport, an affidavit in this regard shall be filed by him before the trial court. Order Date :- 13.5.2022/Praveen Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.05.13 13:37:47 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad