Allowed

Vahid Raja v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC7 Jan 2025BAIL/76/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of Vahid Raja accused of offences under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act. The court considered the lack of criminal history, the fact that co-accused were granted bail, and the legal arguments regarding ownership of the truck involved.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to conditions.

Vahid Raja vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:938

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 76 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vahid Raja Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Pradyumn Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary and charge sheet in this case has also been submitted.

¶7

Heard Shri Pradyumn Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Vahid Raja for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 460 of 2023, under Section 3/5A/8 The U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and 11(Gha) Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act, 1960, Police Station Kasimpur, District Hardoi, during trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that it is a case of false implication. The applicant is shown the owner of a truck, which is shown to have been intercepted and a person sitting therein and absconded and on a search the prohibited animals of cow progeny were found which were being taken for the purpose of slaughtering.

¶10

It is further submitted that even if the case of the prosecution is admitted as it is, the relevant provision as contained under Section 5A of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act would not attract against the applicant, moreover, at the relevant point of time the applicant was not the owner of the truck.

¶11

It is next submitted that applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 09.12.2024 and he is not having any criminal history. Charge sheet in this case has already been filed. Identically placed co-accused persons of the alleged crime, namely, Gulfam @ Michau, Mohd. Gulzar, Tanveer and Saddam Husain has been granted bail by this Court, vide orders dated

¶12

16.02.2024, 05.03.2024, 29.02.2024 and 04.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 1728 of 2024, 2538 of 2024, 1317 of 2024 and 2496 of 2024, respectively. There is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty.

¶13

Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed an heinous offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶14

Considering the fact that all other co-accused persons of the crime have already released on bail and it has been vehemently submitted before this Court that even if the case of the prosecution is believed as it is, Section 5A of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act would not attract against the applicant and having regard to the period of incarceration already undergone by the applicant since 09.12.2024 and also that he is not having any criminal history, a case of bail is emerging in favour of the applicant. The presence of the applicant may be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions.

¶15

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. Thus, the bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the accused/applicant- Vahid Raja involved in abovementioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and

¶22

sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶23

Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

¶24

Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Praveen

¶25

Digitally signed by :- PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vahid Raja v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vahid Raja v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Shamshad Alias Qawwal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Haneef @ Shareef vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Atul Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Altaf Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Noor Mohammad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Forest, Lko. and Others

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