Shah Alam v. State of U.P
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 11 Feb 2022
- Bench
- KRISHAN PAHAL
Outcome
Allowed
application is allowed
Provisions considered
- Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 ss. 3, 5, 8
- Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act s. 11
- Constitution of India art. 21
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 82, 313
Judgment
Heard Shri Ravi Shankar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State through Video Conferencing and also perused the material placed on record. By means of the present application, the applicant- Shah Alam, seeks bail in Case Crime No.329 of 2021, under Sections 3/5/8 Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 & Section 11 Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station- Alapur, District- Budaun, during the pendency of trial. As per prosecution story, on 20.11.2021, 50 kgs. Beef and slaughtering implements are said to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that the co- accused Naim and Furkan are said to have fled away from the spot and the applicant was arrested on the spot. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 20.11.2021 and he deserves to be released on bail.
Operative part
In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant on the ground that the recovered beef is of cow progeny. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. who is involved in Let the applicant- Shah Alam, aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 11.2.2022 Zafar ZAFAR ANSARI Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 — ss. 3, 5, 8; Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act — s. 11; Constitution of India — art. 21; Indian Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 82, 313.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 11 Feb 2022. The bench was KRISHAN PAHAL.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.