Allowed

Udal Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2024ABAIL/5928/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case under the Cow Slaughter Act. Relying on the irrefutable genuineness of a rent agreement showing the vehicle was rented to the co-accused and lack of evidence regarding slaughtering intent, the Court allowed bail subject to standard conditions despite the applicant's criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted till conclusion of trial on furnishing personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of appearance and non-interference.

Udal Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:123501

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5928 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Udal Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Sri Kunwar Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that he has received the instructions, therefore, the instant anticipatory bail application may be finally disposed off.

¶8

Heard Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Tejendra Bahadur, learned AGA, for the State.

¶9

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.202 of 2023, under Section 3/5A/5B/8 Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Dildarnagar, District Ghazipur during pendency of the trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR but during investigation on the basis of the fact that he was the owner of the vehicle from which cattle were recovered, he was made accused in the present matter.

¶11

He further submits that there is no evidence that the alleged cattle were being transported for slaughtering.

¶12

He further submits that however applicant is having criminal history of six other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the instant anticipatory bail application.

¶13

He further submits that actually on 30.11.2023, i.e., even before the date of incident applicant had given his vehicle on rent to coaccused Sunil Kumar and this fact is evident from page 26 of the paper book and if co-accused Sunil Kumar after taking his vehicle on rent misused the same then applicant cannot be held liable.

¶14

He further submits that however applicant is having criminal antecedents of six other cases but his criminal history has been explained in the instant anticipatory bail application.

¶15

He further submits that investigation of the case is pending and police is trying to arrest the applicant.

¶16

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that applicant is the owner of the truck and from his vehicle five cattle were recovered which were being transported for slaughtering but he could not dispute the genuineness of rent agreement executed between the applicant and co-accused Sunil Kumar which has been annexed at page 26 of the paper book.

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶18

However, it reflects that applicant is the owner of the vehicle and from his vehicle five cattle were recovered but there is no cogent evidence which can show that the alleged recovered cattle were being transported for slaughtering.

¶19

Further, at page 26 of the paper book an agreement has been annexed which alleged to have been executed between applicant and co-accused Sunil Kumar and from its perusal it reflects that on 30.11.2023, i..e, before the alleged recovery applicant has given his vehicle to co-accused Sunil Kumar on rent.

¶20

Further, the genuineness of rent agreement dated 30.11.2023 annexed at page 26 of the paper book could not be controverted by learned AGA.

¶21

Further, however, applicant is having criminal antecedents of six other cases but his criminal antecedents has been explained in the instant anticipatory bail application and apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out a this stage.

¶22

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till the conclusion of the trial.

¶23

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail anticipatory application is allowed.

¶24

In the event of arrest of the applicant -Udal Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till the conclusion of the trial case on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court concerned with the conditions:-

¶25

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶26

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the

¶27

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.

¶28

(iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court;

¶29

(iv) that the applicant shall not temper with the evidence during the trial;

¶30

(v) that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶31

(vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶32

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicants.

¶33

It is made clear that the observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶34

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 SKM

¶35

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Udal Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udal Kumar v. State of U.P. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt Geeta Devi vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Sarvjeet Herbert vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Sandeep Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Kumar Srivastava vs State of Up and Another

Badal Keshari vs State of Up and Another

Roop Singh vs State of U.P. and Another