Allowed

Satish v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2025BAIL/2332/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Section 483 BNSS in a cow slaughter case; no independent witness to recovery, applicant in jail since August 2024 with no criminal history. Court enlarged the applicant on bail on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering or intimidating witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding trial appearance and non-tampering/non-intimidation.

Satish vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27493

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2332 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Satish Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad,Sunil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶7

The instant bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 528 of 2024, under Sections 3/5A/8 U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and 3/11 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. False recovery of livestock has been shown from a vehicle, which does not belong to the applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. No cow meat was recovered from the alleged vehicle. The applicant is in jail since 08.08.2024 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost six months and after submission of the chargesheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Satish, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

¶12

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶13

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,

¶14

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶16

Order Date :- 27.2.2025 SKT/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHIVA KANT TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish v. State of U.P.

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

Shiva vs State of U.P.

Devendra Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vimlesh Beldar vs State of U.P.

Rajeev vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anshuman Singh vs State of U.P.

Mahipal Singh vs State of U.P.