Amarjeet Maurya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41369

Court No. - 69

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2255 of 2025

Applicant :- Amarjeet Maurya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mary Puncha (Sheeb Jose),Mohd. Kalim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Session in Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under sections 3/5A/5B/8 of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Sadat, District- Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is alleged to be the owner of the Magic Pickup vehicle. False recovery of livestock has been shown from the alleged vehicle. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. Further, during the course of investigation, the applicant was granted protection till submission of Police report by this Court vide order dated 15.02.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 2030 of 2024 (Amarjeet Maurya vs. State of U.P.). Investigation has been completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation. No custodial interrogation is required. The applicant has been summoned by the concerned court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case. In case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶9

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

¶10

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. During the course of investigation, the

¶11

applicant was granted protection till submission of Police report by this Court. Charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant had cooperated in the investigation and no custodial interrogation is required, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant Amarjeet Maurya involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) the applicant shall make himself available on each date fixed in the matter by the court concerned;

¶14

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court;

¶15

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport the same shall be deposited by him before the concerned court.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶17

The application stands disposed of.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Sachin Mishra

¶19

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

Amarjeet Maurya v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjeet Maurya v. State of U.P. and Another

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