Allowed

Pankaj Gond @ Pankaj Gaud v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Anothers

Allahabad HC9 Apr 2025NABAIL/302/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS concerning a case under Section 109 BNS and the Cow Slaughter Act, where the applicant was allegedly implicated only as owner of a pickup van transporting cows. The court noted he was not apprehended from the spot, had no criminal history, and granted anticipatory bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on anticipatory bail in event of arrest on personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions.

Pankaj Gond @ Pankaj Gaud Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19900

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 302 of 2025 Applicant :- Pankaj Gond @ Pankaj Gaud Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Anothers Counsel for Applicant :- Nijam Ahamad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party. Notice to opposite party no.2 stands dispensed with.

¶6

First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 0213 of 2024, under Section 109 BNS and Section 3/5A/8 of Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, P.S. Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶7

As per contents of first information report, incident is said to have taken place on 11.09.2024 when a police party intercepted a pickup van which was transporting cows. It is alleged that persons travelling in pickup van thereafter open fired upon police party.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and that there is no allegation of any involvement of applicant in the charges levelled against him. It is submitted that applicant was not apprehended from spot and even otherwise there is neither any injury on any police personnel or even recovery of any animal which would be referable to the sections of Cow Slaughter Act. It is also submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history and his involvement has been indicated only as owner of the said pickup van. It is submitted that investigation is still ongoing.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed anticipatory bail application with the submission that applicant is clearly the owner of pickup van which was involved in the aforesaid incident. He however admits that the applicant was not apprehended from the spot or there was any recovery from him.

¶10

It is also admitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history.

¶11

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that applicant has not been apprehended from the spot nor is there any allegation or recovery from him. It appears his involvement has been indicated only on the aspect that he is owner of the said vehicle. It is also admitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. Learned counsel for applicant has also provided an undertaking of applicant that he shall cooperate in the investigation.

¶12

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 .

¶13

In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Pankaj Gond @ Pankaj Gaud shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) that the applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(ii) that 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/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶16

(iii) that the applicant(s) shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶17

(iv) that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant(s) shall not tamper with the evidence

¶18

during the trial;

¶19

(v) that the applicant(s) shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶20

(vi) that the applicant(s) shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶21

(vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions, benefit of this order would not be available to applicant(s)

¶22

The application stands allowed .

¶23

Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Subodh/-

¶24

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

Pankaj Gond @ Pankaj Gaud v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Anothers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Gond @ Pankaj Gaud v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Anothers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chandni Shukla @ Chandni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dr. Saqib Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Satyam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Aditay Singh Paliwal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mahi Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Siddharth Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow