State of U.P v. Party

3. Heard Ms. Sufia Saba, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing 2 BAIL No. 22912 of 2025 the State. laboratory irregularity or illegality against

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been engaged in a business of selling buffalo meat under valid licence for last 30 years. There was no complaint of any applicant and the licence of the applicant was never suspended. The applicant has been falsely implicated by manipulating report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025, wherein initially, it was mentioned that samples belong to buffalo meat or its progeny, but later on by manipulation the word 'buffalo' has been substituted with word 'cow'. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.06.2025 having no criminal antecedent and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate upon instructions opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that after taking samples from the shop of applicant and co-accused Shakeel, the same were sent to the laboratory. After analysis, constable Pawan Kumar Yadav (C.P. No. 105) received the laboratory report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025 and handed over to the office of Circle Officer. At that time said envelope containing report was sealed but when constable Pawan Kumar Yadav further handed over the said report to the Veterinary Officer, then he found that the envelope was opened, therefore he refused to accept the same and made a complaint to the concerned person of the laboratory. Then officer concerned of laboratory directly sent the report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025 through Email to Veterinary Officer wherein it was mentioned that the sample belongs to cow or its progeny. It is also submitted that an inquiry has been instituted against Constable Pawan Kumar Yadav (C.P. No. 105), therefore bail application is liable to be rejected.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that the F.I.R. and the prosecution of the applicant are based upon the laboratory report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025. On putting query, learned State counsel submits that the original laboratory report dated 28.05.2025 is not available on record and charge-sheet has been filed on the basis of 3 BAIL No. 22912 of 2025 laboratory report dated 28.05.2025 sent by concerned officer of laboratory through Email to Veterinary Officer. The counsel for the applicant is relying upon the photostat copy of the report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025, wherein it is mentioned that sample belongs to ‘buffalo’ or its progeny, whereas the State has relied upon the photostat copy of the same report dated 28.05.2025, wherein it is mentioned that sample belongs to ‘cow’ or its progeny. As per statement of learned A.G.A. inquiry in this regard is going on.

7. Since the allegation of the prosecution and the defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial court, therefore, this Court while considering the prayer for bail of the applicant in exercise of its powers under Section 483 B.N.S.S., 2023 is not recording any finding about the genuineness of the said reports produced by the applicant and the State in their respective favour and under the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that which report is correct, which can be adjudicated by the trial court after leading evidence in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. So far as prayer for bail of the applicant is concerned, this Court is of the view that it is well settled that where, there is no certainty about any relevant fact, benefit of doubt always goes in favour of the accused, hence in the light of said principle, prima facie, the applicant has made out a case for bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Wahid, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. inducement, (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make to any person threat or promise acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. 4 BAIL No. 22912 of 2025 (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

10. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

11. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial. (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) September 9, 2025 Kashifa KASHIFA KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

3. Heard Ms. Sufia Saba, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing 2 BAIL No. 22912 of 2025 the State. laboratory irregularity or illegality against

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been engaged in a business of selling buffalo meat under valid licence for last 30 years. There was no complaint of any applicant and the licence of the applicant was never suspended. The applicant has been falsely implicated by manipulating report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025, wherein initially, it was mentioned that samples belong to buffalo meat or its progeny, but later on by manipulation the word 'buffalo' has been substituted with word 'cow'. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 13.06.2025 having no criminal antecedent and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate upon instructions opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that after taking samples from the shop of applicant and co-accused Shakeel, the same were sent to the laboratory. After analysis, constable Pawan Kumar Yadav (C.P. No. 105) received the laboratory report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025 and handed over to the office of Circle Officer. At that time said envelope containing report was sealed but when constable Pawan Kumar Yadav further handed over the said report to the Veterinary Officer, then he found that the envelope was opened, therefore he refused to accept the same and made a complaint to the concerned person of the laboratory. Then officer concerned of laboratory directly sent the report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025 through Email to Veterinary Officer wherein it was mentioned that the sample belongs to cow or its progeny. It is also submitted that an inquiry has been instituted against Constable Pawan Kumar Yadav (C.P. No. 105), therefore bail application is liable to be rejected.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that the F.I.R. and the prosecution of the applicant are based upon the laboratory report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025. On putting query, learned State counsel submits that the original laboratory report dated 28.05.2025 is not available on record and charge-sheet has been filed on the basis of 3 BAIL No. 22912 of 2025 laboratory report dated 28.05.2025 sent by concerned officer of laboratory through Email to Veterinary Officer. The counsel for the applicant is relying upon the photostat copy of the report No. 5165 dated 28.05.2025, wherein it is mentioned that sample belongs to ‘buffalo’ or its progeny, whereas the State has relied upon the photostat copy of the same report dated 28.05.2025, wherein it is mentioned that sample belongs to ‘cow’ or its progeny. As per statement of learned A.G.A. inquiry in this regard is going on.

7. Since the allegation of the prosecution and the defence of the accused are still open to be urged before the trial court, therefore, this Court while considering the prayer for bail of the applicant in exercise of its powers under Section 483 B.N.S.S., 2023 is not recording any finding about the genuineness of the said reports produced by the applicant and the State in their respective favour and under the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that which report is correct, which can be adjudicated by the trial court after leading evidence in accordance with law at the appropriate stage. So far as prayer for bail of the applicant is concerned, this Court is of the view that it is well settled that where, there is no certainty about any relevant fact, benefit of doubt always goes in favour of the accused, hence in the light of said principle, prima facie, the applicant has made out a case for bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed.

9. Let the applicant-Wahid, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (i) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. inducement, (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make to any person threat or promise acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. 4 BAIL No. 22912 of 2025 (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

10. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

11. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial. (Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.) September 9, 2025 Kashifa KASHIFA KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad