Allowed

Arshad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2022BAIL/30760/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, emphasizing the significant delay of over five months in lodging the FIR without explanation, noting a similar case where a co-accused was already released.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering, influencing witnesses, or absconding.

Arshad Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30760 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arshad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Gaurav Sharma, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 41 of 2022, under Sections 3,5,8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Mantola, District Agra during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged against four accused persons including the applicant alleging that co-accused persons Irshad, Rihan and the applicant had slaughtered a cow progeny and they had handed it over to the co-accused Waqar for selling.

¶8

As per the F.I.R. allegation, flesh of cow progeny was recovered from the shop of Waqar.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant has not committed any offence as has been alleged in the F.I.R. and nothing has been recovered from the applicant. It has further been stated in the affidavit that the applicant is the sole bread earner in his family and due to his incarceration, his family is facing severe difficulties. The affidavit also asserts that the applicant has no previous criminal history and it contains an undertaking that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not abscond or tamper with the evidence nor intimidate the witnesses.

¶10

The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the other co-accused Rihan has already been granted bail by means of an order dated 04.07.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 25374 of 2022. His submission is that the case set up against the applicant is similar to that set up against the other co-accused Rihan, who has already been released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspect of the matter.

¶12

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact that the incident is alleged to have occurred on 07.11.2021 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 11.04.2022 after a delay of more than five months and no explanation has been given for the delay in lodging the F.I.R., I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶13

In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Arshad be released on bail in Case Crime No. 41 of 2022, under Sections 3,5,8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Mantola, District Agra on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 2.8.2022

¶21

Jaswant

¶22

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.08.04 15:02:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arshad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshad 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

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Asha Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Nagar Vs State of U.P.

Madan @ Madan Lal Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Dodraj Vs State of U.P.