Dismissed

Bhoora v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2024/2359/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by Bhoora under Section 438 CrPC. The application sought bail for a case involving the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955. The court denied bail citing the applicant's role as vehicle owner, the gravity of the offense, and a prior criminal history of three cases under the same act. The reference to narcotics and pension w

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was dismissed; no bail granted.

Bhoora Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:70545

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2359 of 2024 Applicant :- Bhoora Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 74 of 2024, under sections 3/5ka/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 at P.S.Ajgain District -Unnao.

¶7

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the applicant is the owner of D.C.M. and he had no knowledge that the D.C.M. was being used for carrying out the cow progenies for slaughtering. He also added that the other co-accused person has already been granted regular bail.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the applicant is the owner of the vehicle in question and further there are three cases criminal history against the applicant and out of which two cases pertains to Cow Slaughter Act and thus, the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶9

Considering the complicity of the accused and gravity of the offence including the fact that the applicant is the owner of D.C.M. by which the cow progenies were taken away for slaughtering and further the applicant has three repeated criminal history of cow slaughter therefore, this Court finds no good ground to grant the anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

¶10

Consequently, the instant anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed.

¶11

Consigned to records.

¶12

Order Date :- 21.10.2024/Mayank

¶13

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Bhoora v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhoora v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Bachan Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vandana Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Praveen Kumar Upadhyay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Chandan Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Bhoora vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Suresh Kumar Gupta and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.