Vijendra Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25930 of 2025

Vijendra Kumar Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus
State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Hari Narayan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 70

¶6

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 160 of 2025, under Section 325 of B.N.S., read with Section 3/5A/5B/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station- Salempur, District- Deoria, during pendency of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is neither the owner nor driver of the truck in which sixteen cows were found while transporting. The applicant is the only a passenger and he was travelling in the said truck. The applicant has no concern with the alleged recovery. There is no public witness of the alleged recovery. Neither any meat nor any article of slaughtering has been recovered from the applicant or at his pointing out. It is further submitted that there is no public eye witnesses in the case and the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case, therefore, the applicant be enlarged on bail by this Court sympathetically. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is jail since 08.05.2025.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed the above facts asserted on behalf of applicant.

¶11

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view, that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

BAIL No. 25930 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

Let applicant- Vijendra Kumar Singh , involved in the above mentioned crime be enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶16

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶18

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶19

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶21

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶22

September 12, 2025 Mustaqeem.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vijendra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijendra Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.

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