Allahabad High Court
HAZI ARIFversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA
Holding
Given the seriousness of the offence and the applicant’s habitual criminal record, bail could not be granted.
Summary
The Allahabad High Court considered the bail application of Hazi Arif, accused under sections 3, 5 and 8 of the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act for alleged slaughter of fourteen cows. The applicant claimed innocence, argued that the house shown in the police site plan did not belong to him, and that he was not served with a summons, while noting that a co‑accused senior citizen had been granted bail. The State highlighted the recovery of the slaughtered cows from the applicant’s premises and his extensive criminal history of 56 cases, including 16 under the Cow Slaughter Act, portraying him as a habitual offender. The Court examined the gravity of the offence, the applicant’s criminal record, and the risk of future offences, concluding that there was no reasonable ground to believe he would not reoffend. Accordingly, the bail application was rejected on 9 February 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused with a substantial criminal history and serious charges under the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act
- Whether procedural irregularities such as non‑service of summons affect the applicant’s eligibility for bail
Legislation cited
- Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act — s. 3, 5, 8
Subjects
- bail
- Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act
- habitual offender
- criminal history
- procedural lapse
- grave offence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42715 of 2025
Hazi Arif
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ankit Agarval, Dilip Kumar Patel
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 68
HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Shri Ankit Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri
Manoj Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused
the record.
2. The instant bail application at the instance of the applicant, Hazi Arif,
has been filed seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 20 of 2014,
under Section 3/5/8 Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station
Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahar.
3. It has been argued that the accused-applicant is innocent and has been
falsely implicated in this very case for ulterior motive. Learned counsel
for the applicant submits that a First Information Report was lodged on
07.02.2014 by the Sub Inspector Ganesh Singh Chauhan, against three
named persons including the applicant with the allegation that on an
information of informer, regarding cow slaughtering in the house of the
applicant, the police team raided the house in question and recovered 14
slaughtered and one live progenies, two knives, two blood stained axe but
all the accused persons fled away from the spot. Learned counsel for the
applicant further submits that in the site plan prepared by the
Investigating Officer, the house shown as a place of incident, is not
belonging to the applicant. He further submits that in the present case
charge sheet has been filed on 25.05.2014, cognizance of the same has
been taken by the Court concerned on 17.07.2014. It has been further
argued that summon against the applicant was issued on 17.07.2014 but
the same was not served upon the applicant and thereafter on 15.03.2018
bailable warrant was issued against the applicant but up to 17.04.2025 the
applicant was not aware about the aforesaid proceedings. On 25.04.2025
the bail application, moved by the applicant before the trial Court, was
rejected by the trial Court and the applicant was sent to jail. Learned
counsel for the applicant further submits that co-accused Yameen has
been granted bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.
BAIL No. 42715 of 2025
2
42628 of 2025, vide order dated 05.02.2026. Learned counsel for the
applicant submits that criminal history of 56 cases have been properly
explained in the supplementary affidavit and there is no likelihood of his
fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of
release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
4. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicant with the contention that 14 slaughtered cow have been
recovered from the place of incident. The said place of incident is
belonging to the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has
criminal history of 56 cases, out of which 16 cases are only of Cow
Slaughter and Animal Cruelty Act, 7 cases of gangster act, several cases
are of Gunda Act and other Acts, explained in the supplementary affidavit
filed in support of bail application, from which it is clear that the
applicant is a habitual offender and involved in criminal activities since
long. He further submits that co-accused Yameen has been granted bail by
this Court because of being senior citizen. He further submits that in case
of grant of bail to the applicant there would be great danger of law and
order in the society hence his bail is liable to be rejected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. From the aforesaid arguments, it reflects, apart from the present case,
applicant is having criminal history of 56 other cases which clearly shown
that he is continuously indulged in the crime of cow slaughtering and
other crimes. Thus, there is no reasonable ground for this Court to believe
that the applicant is not a guilty of such offences and applicant is not
likely to commit any offence in future while on bail.
7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature
of allegations, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances
of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail.
Hence, bail application of the applicant is hereby rejected.
(Ashutosh Srivastava,J.)
February 9, 2026
Deepak/
Digitally signed by :-
DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…