High Court · 2025
Case Details
Heard learned Counsel for the applicants, learned Counsel for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 699 of 2024, under Sections 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act and under Section 11(1) of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station Mohammadi, District Kheri. Vide order dated 16.12.2024, notices were issued to the complainant and as per office report, the same has been served personally but no one is present on behalf of the complainant. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 16.12.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 699 of 2024, under section 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter act and Section 11(1) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and section- 3/25 of Arms Act P.S.- Mohammadi District- Kheri. The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicants were not arrested on spot and no incriminating articles have been recovered from their possession. He added that only on the basis of suspicion as well as the confessional statement of the co-accused, the applicants have been implicated and further added that the applicants undertake that they will cooperate with the investigation proceedings and they would never abscond from the same. He submits that the applicants have no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 31 of the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application. He also submits that there is apprehension that the applicants will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the applicants may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are involved in committed offence, as such, they are not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicants- Ateek Miyan, Danish and Akram shall be released forthwith, in case of their arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Let notice be issued to the complainant, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter on 22.01.2025. In the meantime, the State as well as opposite party no. 2 may file their counter affidavits." From perusal of the order dated 16.12.2024, it transpires that learned State Government as well as learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 were granted time to file counter affidavit but no counter affidavit has been as yet. Learned State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicants were enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Ateek Miyan, Danish and Akram till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 kkv/ KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Heard learned Counsel for the applicants, learned Counsel for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 699 of 2024, under Sections 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act and under Section 11(1) of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station Mohammadi, District Kheri. Vide order dated 16.12.2024, notices were issued to the complainant and as per office report, the same has been served personally but no one is present on behalf of the complainant. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 16.12.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to release them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 699 of 2024, under section 3/5/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter act and Section 11(1) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and section- 3/25 of Arms Act P.S.- Mohammadi District- Kheri. The contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the applicants were not arrested on spot and no incriminating articles have been recovered from their possession. He added that only on the basis of suspicion as well as the confessional statement of the co-accused, the applicants have been implicated and further added that the applicants undertake that they will cooperate with the investigation proceedings and they would never abscond from the same. He submits that the applicants have no previous criminal history as is mentioned in paragraph no. 31 of the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application. He also submits that there is apprehension that the applicants will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the applicants may be granted anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the submissions aforesaid and submits that the applicants are involved in committed offence, as such, they are not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, till the next date of listing, the present applicants- Ateek Miyan, Danish and Akram shall be released forthwith, in case of their arrest in the aforesaid case crime (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on their furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case chargesheet is submitted the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Let notice be issued to the complainant, returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a week. If steps are taken, office shall proceed accordingly. List/put up this matter on 22.01.2025. In the meantime, the State as well as opposite party no. 2 may file their counter affidavits." From perusal of the order dated 16.12.2024, it transpires that learned State Government as well as learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 were granted time to file counter affidavit but no counter affidavit has been as yet. Learned State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicants were enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Ateek Miyan, Danish and Akram till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 kkv/ KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench