Israeel v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 290 of 2025, under Section 3/5/8 of The Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, and 11 Animal Cruelty Act P.S. Para District Lucknow. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been planted by the police in the present case. He submits that the applicant is admittedly the helper and the live cow progenies were recovered though, those were not being carried out for slaughtering and there is no such evidence at all. She added that there is no previous criminal antecedents of the applicant as is mentioned in paragraph no. 22 of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 19.4.2025 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty and would co- operate in the trial proceedings.

Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that there is no cogent piece of evidence to connect him in the instant matter; there is no previous criminal history of the applicant as mentioned in paragraph no. 22 of the bail application; the applicant is law abiding citizen; and the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.4.2025 and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

Let the applicant- Israeel involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. They shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) 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 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 23.6.2025 Mayank MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench