Allowed

Mohd. Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021BAIL/26243/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by three applicants accused under the Cow Slaughter Act and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The court held that a fit case for bail was made out and granted release upon filing a bond and sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding court appearances and conduct during the trial.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicants Mohd. Faizan, Saibu and Aslam @ Lala on bail furnished by a personal bond and two sureties each.

Mohd. Faizan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26243 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Faizan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Monis,Deena Nath Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to release the applicants on bail in Case Crime No. 149 of 2020, under Section 3/5A/8 Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, police station Aurai, district Bhadohi during the pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are absolutely innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that applicant No. 1, Mohd Faizan is only the truck driver and has nothing to do with the alleged recovery of cattle and applicant No. 2 and 3, namely, Saibu and Aslam @ Lala are the cleaner of the truck. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that 27 live oxen and bulls are said to have been recovered from the Truck bearing No. UP21CN3061. Learned counsel for the applicants also submits that the animals belong to the owner of the truck and the applicants were only transporting the cattle to the cattle market. Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that in this case there is neither any allegation of slaughtering nor any slaughtering was done. He also submits that the prosecution story is nothing but a bundle of lie. Applicant No. 1, Faizan has a criminal history of three cases, in which he has been granted bail by the court concerned and the

¶8

same has very well been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the application. The applicants No. 2 and 3 do not have any criminal history to their credit. The applicants are facing detention since 25.6.2020. In case the applicants are released on bail they will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage therefore, the applicant does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicants have made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶11

Let the applicants Mohd. Faizan, Saibu and Aslam @ Lala 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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.

¶13

(ii) The applicants 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 them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is

¶15

issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) The applicants 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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

¶17

(v) The applicants shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶18

(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶19

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶20

It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.

¶21

Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Sumaira

Mohd. Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Faizan and 2 Others v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirdosh @ Kalyan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Parmanand Baba Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan @ Kale Vs State of U.P.

Sangeeta Lodh @ Chinki Vs State of U.P.

Kamal Kishor Vs State of U.P.

Rahmat Khan Vs State of U.P.