In a criminal bail application, the High Court granted bail to the applicant in a case involving cow slaughter and animal cruelty charges, subject to conditions including an undertaking not to seek adjournments and presence at proceedings.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47131 of 2022 Applicant :- Akash Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Heard Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Shravan Kumar Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the entire material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Akash Kumar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 166 of 2022, under Sections 3/5A/5B/8 of the Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty Against Animal Act, Police Station Sakaldiha, District-Chandauli, during the pendency of trial.
As per the prosecution case as unfolded in the first information report, on 21st September, 2022, when the first informant along with other Police personnel were on patrolling duty, on suspicion, they intercepted a Magic Vehicle bearing No. UP50-CT-0316 and when the Police personnels interrogated the driver and cleaner of the said vehicle as there was two animals loaded in the said vehicle, they disclosed their names as Lucky Kumar and Akash Kumar (present applicant) as driver and cleaner respectively. They have also disclosed that they were taken the said animals to Bengal via Bihar for the purposes of slaughtering.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present first information report lodged by the informant i.e. Police is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging their names in a fake, false and frivolous case. The entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected by the informant. It is further submitted that nothing incriminating i.e beef etc. has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or his pointing out. The alleged recovery of two cow, one Chapad alleged to have been recovered from the magic vehicle are of the applicant and co-accused and the same were taken for selling in market. Only on the basis of suspicion the applicant and the co-accused have been implicated in the present case. There is no eye-witness or public witness on the basis of which it can be said that the applicant is involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 21st September, 2022.
Per contra learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the
complainant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but they could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)
Order Date :- 19.11.2022 Sushil/-
Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.22 10:24:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant be released on bail in the pending trial for Cow Slaughter Act offences.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Akash Kumar
State of U.P.
Shiv Shanker Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
