Disposed¶20

Guddu Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 May 2025NABAIL/4246/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail under S.482 BNSS; charges under Ss. 3/5A/8 U.P. Cow Slaughter Prohibition Act, S. 11 Animal Cruelty Act and S. 325 B.N.S.; bail confined till submission of police report; name disclosed by co-accused Gayasuddin in police custody; no independent witness to alleged recovery from pick-up vehicle; personal bond Rs. 50,000 with two sureties; investigation to be completed preferably within three months; Allahabad High Court; Vivek Varma, J.; decided 28.5.2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail to Guddu Yadav in Case Crime No.113 of 2025 till submission of police report under section 193(3) B.N.S., on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, subject to stated conditions; applicant to produce a copy of the order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days. ¶20

Guddu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Guddu Yadav is entitled to anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.113 of 2025, P.S. Bariyarpur, District Deoria.

¶7

Court's answer

Considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the fact that his name was disclosed by co-accused Gayasuddin in police custody, absence of an independent witness to the alleged recovery, and absence of substantive evidence at this stage linking the applicant with the offence, and without commenting on merits, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest, the applicant Guddu Yadav is to be released on anticipatory bail in the case crime till submission of police report under section 193(3) B.N.S., on a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer, subject to conditions (availability for interrogation; no inducement, threat or promise; no leaving India without permission and deposit of passport).

¶13

Key takeaways

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months from production of a copy of the order, independently and without being prejudiced by any observation made by the Court.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted — Allahabad High Court (Vivek Varma, J.). Applicant's name was disclosed by co-accused Gayasuddin in police custody; false recovery allegedly shown from a pick-up vehicle with no independent witness; no credible/substantive evidence at this stage linking the applicant with the offence; no criminal antecedents. Without commenting on merits, anticipatory bail granted in Case Crime No.113 of 2025 (Ss. 3/5A/8 U.P. Cow Slaughter Prohibition Act, S. 11 Animal Cruelty Act, S. 325 B.N.S.), P.S. Bariyarpur, District Deoria, confined till submission of police report under S. 193(3) B.N.S., on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount, with standard conditions; Investigating Officer directed to conclude investigation preferably within three months without being prejudiced by the Court's observations.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91230

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4246 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Guddu Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Saroj Kumar Dubey,Vishwa Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

The present application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No.113 of 2025, under section 3/5A/8 U.P. Cow Slaughter Prohibition Act, Section 11 of Animal Cruelty Act and Section 325 B.N.S., P.S. Bariyarpur, District Deoria.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The name of the applicant was disclosed by the co-accused Gayasuddin in police custody. The said statement, insofar as it implicates the applicant, is unreliable. False recovery has been shown from a pick-up vehicle. There is no independent witness to the alleged recovery. At this stage, there is no credible evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

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

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of police report.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, the fact that the name of the applicant was disclosed by the co-accused Gayasuddin in police custody; there is no independent witness to the alleged recovery; at this

¶12

stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶13

In the event of arrest, the applicant Guddu Yadav be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under section 193(3) B.N.S., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶15

(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 or to any police officer;

¶16

(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 S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶17

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶18

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶19

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶20

The application stands disposed of.

¶21

Order Date :- 28.5.2025 S.S.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Guddu Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu Yadav 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