Sanjay Kumar vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40278 of 2025

Sanjay Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P.	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Nitin Agarwal, Sushil Kumar Tewari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 71

¶6

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶7

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

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is the owner and driver of the Pickup vehicle and when the police intercepted the said vehicle, three alive cow progenies were found loaded in the said vehicle. It is further submitted that by keeping the alive cow progenies with him the present applicant was transporting them. No cow progenies were killed and no beef has also been recovered from the said vehicle by the police. It is further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any offence. Alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. There is no independent witness of the incident. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit. He has been languishing in jail since 25.10.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

It reveals from the perusal of record that though the applicant was arrested by the police but no incriminating articles have been recovered from the vehicle in question, which was being driven by the present applicant and no beef has been recovered by the police at the time of arresting of the present applicant. No criminal history of the applicant has been brought to the notice of this Court. Applicant is said to be in jail since 25.10.2025. Grounds taken in the bail application are sufficient. Hence, keeping in view the nature of

¶11

BAIL No. 40278 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

the offence, evidence, complicity of accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant Sanjay Kumar involved in Case Crime No.528 of 2025 under Sections 3/5A/5B/8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, Police Station Alinagar, District - Chandauli be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶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 will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

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

¶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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

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

¶21

November 17, 2025 ss

¶22

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State of Up vs Karuwa so Kamal singh

Gulab Kali vs State of U.P. and Another

Dildar Member Alias Dildar Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another

Lokesh vs State of U.P.

Smt Hema @ Prem Lata vs State of U.P.

Malkhan Singh @ Malkhan vs State of U.P.