AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.99 dated 13.06.2026, registered under Sections 325, 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3, 4 and 8 of Punjab Prohibition Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, at Police Station Bareta, District Mansa.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no role in the alleged occurrence. It was argued that the prosecution's allegation that the petitioner fled from the spot is wholly false and concocted. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner was merely driving the vehicle and had no knowledge of the nature of the consignment allegedly being transported. It was also contended that no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner and that he is ready and willing to join the investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when called upon to do so.
Opposing the prayer for anticipatory bail, learned State counsel submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature and pertain to the illegal transportation of cattle for slaughter in violation of the provisions of the Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. It was argued that, acting on a secret information, the complainant reached near the cremation ground, where certain persons were allegedly found forcibly loading cattle into a truck for their transportation to another State for slaughter and sale. Upon an attempt to intercept the vehicle, the driver fled from the spot. During the search of the truck, ten cattle were found loaded therein in a cruel and inhumane manner. Learned State counsel further submitted that the petitioner has been specifically named and identified in the FIR as the driver of the said vehicle, and his custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the entire chain of events and the larger conspiracy behind the commission of the offence.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book with their assistance.
It is befitting to mention here that while considering a plea for grant of anticipatory bail, the Court has to equilibrate between safeguarding individual rights and protecting societal interest(s). The Court ought to reckon with the magnitude and nature of the offence; the role attributed to the accused; the need for fair and free investigation as also the deeper and wide impact of such alleged iniquities on the society. It would be apposite to refer herein judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'State Vs. Anil Sharma', (1997) 7 SCC 187, wherein it has been held as under:
"6.We find, force in the submission of CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well-ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this, effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful information and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders."
Coming to the facts of the present case, the complainant received a secret information that certain persons were forcibly loading cattle into a truck near the cremation ground and that a Swift car was being used as a pilot vehicle. Acting upon the said information, the truck was intercepted, whereupon the driver fled from the spot. Upon inspection, ten cattle were found loaded in the vehicle in a cruel and inhumane manner. The investigation is presently at a nascent stage. The source from which the cattle were procured, their intended destination, and the identity and role of other persons connected with the alleged offence are matters which still require thorough investigation. In the considered opinion of this Court, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to enable the investigating agency to trace the larger network and ascertain the full extent of the alleged criminal activity. Grant of anticipatory bail at this stage would not be conducive to a free, fair and effective investigation.
Accordingly, the present petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed.
It is made clear that nothing said hereinabove shall be deemed to be an expression of opinion upon merits of the case/investigation.