Imran Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62577

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9607 of 2024

Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for respondent State.

¶7

The present application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.61 of 2024 under Section 3/5ka/8 The Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act of 1955 and under Section 11 the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station Behta Mujawar, District Unnao.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that DCM truck was found abandoned on Agra-Lucknow Expressway. Upon enquiry by the police it was found to be loaded with 15 cow progeny. The driver and cleaner were not present.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. He has explained the criminal history of 6 cases in paragraph 8 to the bail application.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. submits that the applicant was arrested in similar crime and during police custody he has confessed his guilt in this case, however he does not dispute the fact that there is no recovery from the applicant.

¶11

Perused the record.

¶12

On due consideration to the facts that the charge-sheet in this case has been filed, the applicant has explained the criminal history, the offence is triable by Magistrate and he is in jail since 16.3.2024 and without expressing any

¶13

opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, bail application is allowed. Let the applicant, Imran involved in Case Crime No.61 of 2024 under Section 3/5ka/8 The Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act of 1955 and under Section 11 the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station Behta Mujawar, District Unnao, 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

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

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

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

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v) 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.

¶20

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 10.9.2024 Madhu

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Imran v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amardeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sher Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Naresh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and Another

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

Adarsh @ Lucky vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Sant Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko