BIHARIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 2375 of 2026

Bihari
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                              .....Opposite
                                                                    Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)           :   Deeksha Gupta, Suneel Thekma
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)      :   G.A.

Court No. - 72
                 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

     1. Heard Mr. Suneel Thekma, learned counsel for the applicant,
     Mr. Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused
     the record.

     2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory
     bail in Case Crime No. 22 of 2026, under Sections 319(2),
     318(4), 336(3), 340(2) of B.N.S. And Sections 3, 5ए, 8 of
     Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, And Section 11 of
     Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station- Lalganj,
     District- Mirjapur, with the prayer that in the event of arrest,
     applicant may be released on bail.

     3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant
     that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
     this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is owner of
     the vehicle from which, nine alive bulls are said to have been
     recovered. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to
     co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when
     required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been
     stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he
     shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the
     investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

     4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the
                                                   NABAIL No. 2375 of 2026
                          2


application for anticipatory bail.

5. As per first information report, the applicant is said to be the
owner of the vehicle from which, nine alive bulls are said to
have recovered.

6. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa
Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has
been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding
anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of
accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee
from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available
material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of
the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

7. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law
regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel
for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and
circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on
merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

8. The anticipatory bail application is allowed.

9. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Bihari involved in the
aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties
each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court
concerned, with the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he
would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless
exempted by the Court concerned;

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not
                                                                                           NABAIL No. 2375 of 2026
                                                                         3


                                           misuse the liberty of bail.

                                           (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior
                                           permission of the Court concerned.

                                           10. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be
                                           at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of
                                           anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.



                                                                                     (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    Rama Kant




Digitally signed by :-
RAMA KANT
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad