Allahabad High Court
VIJAYKANT YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court disposed of the anticipatory bail application, directing the applicants to seek regular bail and restraining any coercive action for four weeks.
Summary
Vijaykant Yadav and another, who have been absconding for 14 years, filed an anticipatory bail application under CrPC s.482 in connection with offences under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (ss.3,5A,8) and the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act, 1960 (s.11). The learned Additional Government Advocate argued that the offences were not punishable with imprisonment exceeding seven years, a charge‑sheet had already been filed and there was no apprehension of arrest, rendering the anticipatory bail plea untenable. The court, noting the submissions, directed the applicants to appear before the trial court and apply for regular bail within four weeks, and ordered that no coercive action be taken against them during that period. The anticipatory bail application was therefore disposed of, with the matter to be decided under the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
Issues considered
- Whether an anticipatory bail application under CrPC s.482 is maintainable when a charge‑sheet is already filed and there is no apprehension of arrest.
- Whether the nature of the offences (punishment less than seven years) affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act, 1960 — s. 11
- U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 — s. 3, 5A, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- CrPC s.482
- U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act
- Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act
- coercive action
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 10289 of 2026
Vijaykant Yadav And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shri Niwash Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. At the very outset, the Learned A.G.A. has raised an objection that the
offences alleged against the applicants are not punishable with
imprisonment exceeding seven years as the offences in question had been
committed before the amendment of 2020. The applicants have been
absconding for the past 14 years. It is further submitted that the
chargesheet has been filed and there is no apprehension of arrest of the
applicants, therefore, the present application seeking anticipatory bail is
not maintainable.
2. After some arguments, Learned counsel for the applicants prays that
the applicants may be permitted to approach the concerned Court and
apply for regular bail, which may be directed to be decided in accordance
with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender
Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021)
10 SCC 773. He further prays that for a short time, the interest of the
applicants may be protected.
3. The learned A.G.A. has no objection to the said prayer.
4. Taking into account the submissions made by the learned counsel for
the parties, it is directed that in case the applicants appear in Case Crime
no.282 of 2012, under Section 3/5A/8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow
Slaughter Act, 1955, Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals
Act, 1960, Police Station Karimuddinpur, District Ghazipur, before the
NABAIL No. 10289 of 2026
2
Court concerned within a period of four weeks from today and apply for
bail, their application for bail shall be considered and disposed of
expeditiously in accordance with law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation &
Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, and also subsequent orders of the Supreme
Court in the aforementioned case, without being influenced by any
observations made by the concerned Court while rejecting the
anticipatory bail application of the applicant.
5. For a period of four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be
taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
6. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application stands
disposed of.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
October 1, 2026
A. Pandey
Digitally signed by :-
ANAND PANDEY
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…