This judgment dismisses a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC regarding allegations of cow smuggling. The court denied bail citing the serious nature of allegations that necessitated custodial interrogation and the issuance of a proclamation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Criminal Misc. No.M- 36163 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.12.2010
Raheesh and another
......Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana
.......Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. Jamshed Ahmed, Advocate, for the petitioners. ****
SABINA, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 87 dated 20.4.2010 under Sections 4-A/8, 2/80 of Cow Slaughter Act registered at Police Station Nagina District Mewat.
The contents of the FIR (Annexure P-1) read as under:-
“To, SHO PS Nagina, Jai Hind. It is requested that I HC, EASI Subhash Chand 303, Ct Suraj 882, CT Lachhman Singh 852, Ct Sunil Kumar 872 along with private vehicle were present at Kansali for patrolling. One special informer gave information to me that Raheesh, Sattam son of Razak, Ashu S/o Chaw Khan, Sadique S/o Dudda Akbam resident of Uttawar and Chanba S/o not known resident of Chorgadi, Police Station Sekri (Rajasthan) are doing the business of cow slaughtering and today these people through a Pickup 407 are coming with from Haryana at mountain of village Kansali for
Criminal Misc. No.M- 36163 of 2010 (O&M) -2-
taking the same to Rajasthan. If nakabandi is held near mountain of Village Kansali, said persons can be apprehended along with cows. Then I HC prepared a raiding party and many peoples of the village Kansali were requested to become and independent witness, but all the peoples belongs to the same community, they showed their inability. That I HC held nakabandi at the said place, then about 30 minutes later a pickup 407 was seen coming from the side of village Kotla. On seeing the police party ahead, he tried to turn back all of sudden. Due to hurry, the driver of the pick up 407 dashed pick up 407 with a big stone and the front side of the said pick up 407 got damaged and said pick up stopped at the spot and all five persons, three sat inside the pick up and two persons sat back side of the pick up, managed to escape from the spot. The names and address of all the five persons i.e. Raheesh, Sattam sons of Rajak, Ashu son of Chaw Khan, Saddique son of Dudda resident of Uttawar, and Chanwa resident of Chotgadi, as owner of the said pick up were identified by the said identified. I HC along with my associates tried to nab the accused persons, but due to the zig-zag of mountain, they succeed in running. When Pick up 407 was got searched, then from the back side of the pick up week kind of cows were recovered,
Criminal Misc. No.M- 36163 of 2010 (O&M) -3-
which were 11 in number and the registration number of the pick up is found as RJ-05G-A5419. All the recovered cows and pick up No.RJ-05G-A5419 were taken into custody vide memo. Signature of the witnesses were taken on the memo because all the accused Raheesh, Sattam, Ashu, Saddique and Chanwa have committee an offence under Section 4A/8, 2/80 CS Act as they have taken week type of cows with an intention to slaughter it. “ Heard.
A perusal of the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, while declining anticipatory bail to the petitioner reveals that a proclamation has been issued against the petitioners.
The allegations levelled against the petitioners are serious in nature. The petitioners might be required for custodial interrogation.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
(SABINA) JUDGE
December 14, 2010 anita
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC should be allowed or dismissed given a proclamation against the petitioner.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raheesh
State of Haryana
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
