Dismissed

State of Up v. Sohil Khan S/o Jamal Khan and another

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2022BAILC/189/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail cancellation application, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad examined whether the lower court erred in granting bail under the U.P. Cow Slaughter Act, 1964. The State prayed for cancellation citing procedural lapses and violation of Section 5A regarding travel with cattle without consent. The Court found insufficient grounds to cancel bail and rejected the application.

What did the court decide?

The bail cancellation application no. 189 of 2022 is rejected, and the bail order dated 23.09.2021 remains operative.

State of Up Vs Sohil Khan S/o Jamal Khan and another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 189 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- State of U.P. Opposite Party :- Sohil Khan S/O Jamal Khan And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Pal

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State-appellant and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

This bail cancellation application has been filed with a prayer to cancel the bail order dated 23.09.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Jhansi on the ground of facts mentioned in para Nos.11, 12 and 13 of the bail cancellation application, which are quoted herein below:-

¶7

" 11. That in the provisions of U.P. Cow Slaughter Act, 1964 it is provided that under Section 16 of the Act without taking consent from competent authority he cannot travel.

¶8

12. That accused was travelled under boarder of U.P. and cows was coming out from outside of U.P. but without taking permission from competent authority he was travelled with cows which is against the provision of Section 5K of the Cow Slaughter Act.

¶9

13. That the learned court without considering the provisions of Section 7(kha) of Cow Slaughter Act, has granted bail to the accused which is illegal and against the law and the order passed by the court below dated 23.09.2021 is liable to be rejected"

¶10

Learned AGA appearing for the State has submitted that the court below while granting the bail to opposite party Nos.1 and 2 has not considered the provisions of Section 5A properly, therefore, bail order dated 23.09.2021 be cancelled.

¶11

It is argued that though opposite party has not misused the bail granted to him. There is no allegation that opposite party after getting bail, has misused the liberty and involved in any anti social activities.

¶12

It is evident from the FIR that the opposite party were intercepted with 30-40 live ox. From the possession of opposite party, no incriminating article has been recovered.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions advanced by learned counsel for the State, I do not find it is a fit case for cancelling the bail of opposite party Nos.1 and 2.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail cancellation application is hereby rejected .

¶15

Order Date :- 2.12.2022 Nitin Verma

¶16

Digitally signed by NITIN KUMAR VERMA Date: 2022.12.21 11:01:56 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

State of Up v. Sohil Khan S/o Jamal Khan and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Up v. Sohil Khan S/o Jamal Khan and another

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

Abhinav Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sonvir Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ashok Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rashmi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.

Tilak @ Gangu Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Pal Vs State of U.P.