Allowed

Mohd Ikram v. State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand HC16 Oct 2025ABA/1183/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand granted an anticipatory bail application filed by Mohd. Ikram regarding allegations of cow slaughter. The applicant, not present at the scene, was not to be held criminally liable without inspection. The court imposed standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on a bond of Rs. 30,000 and two sureties subject to conditions of cooperation and non-escape.

Mohd Ikram Vs State of Uttarakhand — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Uttarakhand HC (2025)

¶1

2025:UHC:9277

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA

¶4

16^TH OCTOBER, 2025

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1183 of 2025

¶6

Mohd. Ikram .....Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Uttarakhand ..…Respondent

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Akshay Latwal, Assistant Government Advocate assisted by Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, Brief Holder.

¶10

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

¶11

This Application for anticipatory bail has been filed in the First Information Report No.379 of 2025, registered at Police Station Bahadrabad, District Haridwar under Section 3, Section 5 read with Section 11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007.

¶12

2. According to the First Information Report, on 30.09.2025, a secret information was received by the police that Ikram (applicant), Intjar, Shamim Ahmed and others are slaughtering cows in the forest. The police raided the spot. They recovered 200 kg. beef and

¶13

¶14

2025:UHC:9277

¶15

other articles from the spot. They noticed that six persons were present on the spot. Seeing the police, all six persons managed to escape from the spot.

¶16

3. H eard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

¶17

4. M r. Gaurav Singh, Advocate contended that the applicant was not present on the spot. He has been falsely implicated by the police. He was not involved in the said offence. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. He is not a convicted person. Intjar and Shamim Ahmed, the co-accused of similar role, have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

¶18

5. M r. Akshay Latwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate , on instruction, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

¶19

6. H aving heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Mohd. Ikram, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal

¶20

¶21

2025:UHC:9277

¶22

bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of

¶23

the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions:-

¶24

(i) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶25

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

¶26

(iii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case;

¶27

(iv) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

¶28

7. It is made clear that if the applicant misuses

¶29

or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

¶30

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

¶31

Dt:16.10.2025

¶32

Neha

¶33

NEHA BISHT Digitally signed by NEHA BISHT DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=6f1c15b6305912b3f008e9a4a8038ee7326b08b2d0e018b01be753f014836d27, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=3D89DC33779FB9677068452F32DE6BA960BFE64D819EE44CA9CCE487B2FE0F92, cn=NEHA BISHT Date: 2025.10.16 19:01:37 +05'30'

¶34

Mohd Ikram v. State of Uttarakhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Ikram v. State of Uttarakhand

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

Amir Vs State of Uttarakhand

Mohmmed Arshan Ahmed Vs State of Uttarakhand

Shane Ilahi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Kheela Devi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Gurvinder Rathi Vs State of Uttarakhand

Chandra Mohan Rana Vs State of Uttarakhand