Allowed

Mohammad Tahseen v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jan 2021BAIL/38276/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Mohammad Tahseen in a case under the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, fixing conditions to ensure his presence during the trial and prohibiting abuse of bail liberty.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and conduct during the trial.

Mohammad Tahseen Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38276 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Tahseen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Devi Dayal,Thakur Prasad Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Mohammad Tahseen with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 77 of 2020, under Section 3/5Ka/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and 11 (Tha) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, police station Kotwali, district Hathras during the pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the prosecution version, on 22.2.2020 police intercepted Truck No. UP 21CN4434 through which 18 live and 2 dead oxen were being transported. It is a case of the prosecution that driver of the said truck succeeded in fleeing away from the place of occurrence. Later on, the name of the applicant came into light on the ground that he is the registered owner of the said truck, and thereafter, he was arrested on 31.8.2020.

¶8

The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive and his arrest has been made much after the incident. It is further submitted that neither the applicant was arrested at the spot nor any incriminating articles recovered from him. It is also submitted that the aforesaid recovery of live and dead oxen is false, fabricated and concocted. There was no independent witness of the recovery. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.8.2020 and has no criminal antecedent to this credit.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail

¶10

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.

¶11

Having considered the submissions of the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits, let the applicant Mohammad Tahseen involved in the aforesaid case, 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶12

(i) The applicant 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 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) 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. 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 7.1.2021 Sumaira

Mohammad Tahseen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Tahseen v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Sangeeta Lodh @ Chinki Vs State of U.P.

Kamal Kishor Vs State of U.P.

Saravan Kumar Garg Vs the State of U.P.

Awdhesh Vs State of Up

Waseem Akhtar Vs State of U.P.