Allahabad High Court
MD KAUSAR KURESHIversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Summary
The applicant, Md Kausar Kureshi, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Code, fearing arrest in a case involving alleged violations of the Arms Act, the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. He argued that he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and only mentioned in a co-accused's confessional statement, with no direct material evidence against him. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute these factual submissions. The court noted that nine animals and firearms were recovered from other accused, and there was no direct evidence linking the applicant to the offences. Considering the lack of material against him and his clean record, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the applicant is not named in the FIR but is mentioned in a co-accused's confessional statement.
- Whether the absence of direct material evidence against the applicant justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the applicant's clean antecedent and similarity to a previously granted bail case affect the decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 3
- BNS — s. 109, 61(2)
- Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act — s. 11
- U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act — s. 3, 5A, 5B, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- confessional statement
- arms possession
- cow slaughter act
- prevention of cruelty to animals
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9872 of 2026
Md Kausar Kureshi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amit Kumar Dwivedi, Pankaj
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A. for the
State as well as perused the record.
2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No. 10 of 2026, under Section 109, 61(2) of
BNS, Section 3/25 of Arms Act, Section 3/5A/5B/8 of U.P. Prevention of
Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Act, Police Station- Ghorawal, District Sonbhadra, with a prayer to
enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in
the abovementioned case.
3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant
has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the
FIR. The name of the applicant surfaced in the confessional statement of
co-accused Sarfaraz @ Monu. The co-accused Nanhak @ Muhammad
Intaj has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No.
4460 of 2026. The case of the applicant stands on a similar footing.
Applicant has no criminal antecedents.
4. The Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail,
but does not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel
for the applicant.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
NABAIL No. 9872 of 2026
2
the parties.
6. Nine animals were recovered from a pickup vehicle and two accused
persons, namely, Om Prakash Yadav and Siddhnath Kharwar were
arrested by the police from whose possession country-made pistols along
with live and spent cartridges were recovered. No meat or carcass was
recovered from the possession of the co-accused. Except for the
confessional statement of the co-accused, there does not appear to be any
other direct material against the applicant.
7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it
appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Mohd Kausar Kureshi, he
shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail
on furnishing a personal bond and surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court
concerned with the following conditions:-
i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police
officer as and when required;
ii. that 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police
officer;
iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission
of the Court;
iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
witness;
10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
NABAIL No. 9872 of 2026
3
11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively
for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.
(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
September 29, 2026
Junaid
Digitally signed by :-
JUNAID AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…