Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

ASHIK LIYAKAT SARDARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal
APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted bail to the applicant, applying the parity principle and noting the lack of incriminating evidence.

Summary

Ashik Liyakat Sardar was arrested in January 2026 for allegedly injecting chemicals into cattle to increase milk yield, facing charges under Sections 123, 210, 274, 276 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 11(1)(g) and 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. The prosecution claimed the raid uncovered chemicals being mixed for injection, but the chemical analyzer report found no oxytocin, a harmful substance, and no incriminating material was left to be seized. The co‑accused had already been released on bail, and the applicant’s role was deemed lesser. The court applied the principle of parity, noting the lack of evidence and the completed investigation, and ordered the applicant’s release on personal bond with conditions. The bail application was allowed and disposed of.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged illegal injection of chemicals into cattle under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act
  • Whether the principle of parity applies when co‑accused have been released on bail
  • Whether the absence of incriminating chemical evidence justifies continued detention

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • animal cruelty
  • chemical injection
  • parity principle
  • criminal procedure
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:41870
                                               -1-
                                                                   939-BA-1610-2026

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1610 OF 2026

                                 ASHIK LIYAKAT SARDAR
                                         VERSUS
                               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                              .....
              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Uday Randhir Sharma a/w Mr. Danish
              Khatik and Mr. Mohit Gavli
              APP for Respondent - State : Mr. D. J. Patil
                                              .....

                                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                                          DATED : 9th SEPTEMBER 2026
              PER COURT :

              1.         Applicant seeks grant of regular bail on account of his

              arrest in Crime No.09 of 2026 registered at Nandurbar City Police

              Station, District Nandurbar for offences punishable under Sections

              123, 210, 274, 276 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and under

              Sections 11(1)(g) and 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act,

              1960.



              2.         Pointing to date of arrest of applicant as 09-01-2026,

              learned counsel submitted that, applicant is behind bars since 6 to

              7 months. That, there are allegations that, applicant indulged in

              giving injections to the cattle to increase the milk yield. Informant

              claims that because of the said inoculation, there is danger to the

              livestock as well as harm to the consumers. That, raid was
                                -2-
                                                    939-BA-1610-2026

accordingly said to be conducted and above crime has been

registered. He pointed out that, whatever material has to be seized

is already seized. Learned counsel submitted that, there is no

incriminating evidence or material regarding above accusations

and there is no evidence to show that milk was circulated among

the masses for consumption. According to him, chargesheet is

already filed in March, 2026. That, nothing further is to be

recovered or discovered from him. That, charge is not yet framed

and as there is uncertainty over commencement of trial, he urges

for bail.



3.          Learned APP would oppose on the ground that, acting

on secret information, raid was carried out to the house of

applicant alongwith forensic team, panchas, and two persons were

found to be in the activity of mixing various chemicals kept in

various containers. That, those persons, on enquiry, informed that,

the preparation was injected in milking cow, however, there was no

licence or permit to conduct such activity. Accordingly, present

applicant Tukaram Gavali and Ashik Liyakat Sardar were taken in

custody alongwith said material and crime was registered.



4.          Learned counsel for applicant submitted that, no

Oxytocin, which said to be harmful, is detected in any of the
                                   -3-
                                                      939-BA-1610-2026

seizure. Learned APP agreed that, but according to her, said

chemical is harmful to cattle.



5.          Now investigation is over. Chemical Analyzer (CA)

report is also gathered, which shows that there was no Oxytocin.

When entire recovery and discovery is carried out, no purpose

would be served by further detention of the applicant.



6.          The co-accused Tukaram Gavali and his son Yash

Tukaram     Gavali       have   already   been   released   on   bail.

Comparatively, the role attributed to the present applicant is much

lesser than the role attributed by the prosecution to the released

co-accused persons. I am satisfied that the law of parity will apply

and accordingly, the following order is passed :


                                 ORDER

     (i)    The application is allowed.


     (ii)   Applicant - Ashik Liyakat Sardar be released on bail in

connection with Crime No.09 of 2026 registered at Nandurbar City

Police Station, District Nandurbar, on executing Personal Bond of

Rs.15,000/- with one local surety in the like amount, on the

following conditions :
                                     -4-
                                                          939-BA-1610-2026

          [a]   The applicant shall not tamper prosecution evidence.


          [b]   The applicant shall not enter the vicinity where

informant resides, till conclusion of trial.



          (iii) The Bail Application is accordingly disposed off.



                                           (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
                                                  JUDGE




Tandale


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.