Allowed

Abid Ansari v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Jun 2017A.B.A./3242/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to Abid Ansari, a driver accused of transporting cattle under sections related to cow slaughter and animal cruelty, based on his lack of knowledge regarding the cattle's purpose and parity with co-accused.

What did the court decide?

The Court admitted the petitioner to anticipatory bail in connection with the pending complaints.

Abid Ansari Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh, in connection with Hazaribagh (Sadar) P.S. Case No.665 of 2013 (G.R. No. 3092 of 2013) subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶2

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶3

Sonu-

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶5

A.B. A. No. 3242 of 2017

¶6

Abid Ansari … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Parties

¶7

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Adv. For the State : Addl. P.P.

¶9

02 /13.06.2017 Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No.337 of 2014 (G.R. No. 1009 of 2014) registered under sections 414 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition Slaughter Act and Section 11 (d) (e) of Animal Cruelty Act.

¶10

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

¶11

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the driver of the vehicle (tractor) bearing Registration No. JH01AA -7304 in which cattles were transported but he has no knowledge that the cattles were transported for slaughtering. Further, he submits that similarly situated co-accused persons of the case namely Nasim Mir and Naeem Hussain have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court in A.B.A. No. 2236 of 2017 and A.B .A. No. 3289 of 2015 vide order dated 21.04.2017 and 01.12.2015 respectively. It is, further, submitted that the case of the co-accused persons stands on the similar footing, as is the case of the petitioner. Hence, on the principle of parity, the petitioner be also given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶12

The learned Addl. P.P. concedes that the allegations against the petitioner are the same as against the accused persons, who have been granted anticipatory bail by this court.

¶13

However, the learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for

¶14

bail.

¶15

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the petitioner Abid Ansari be admitted to anticipatory bail. Hence, in

Abid Ansari v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abid Ansari v. The State Of Jharkhand

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

Similar cases

Sk Mansur Ali And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rashid Anwar Alias Lala And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ibrar Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Taslim Mian Ansari And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Vimal Mehta Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sohrai Bediya Alias Sohrai Kumar Bediya And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand