Safdar vs State Of Uttarakhand

Alok Kumar Verma, J

This is the Second Anticipatory Bail Application, filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with the First Information Report No.129 of 2016, registered at police station Kotwali Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar under Section 3/5/11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007.

First Anticipatory Bail Application was rejected on 31.07.2023 for non-prosecution.

Mr. Rajveer Singh, Advocate, contended that on 31.07.2023, counsel of the applicant was busy in other Court. Therefore, he could not appear before this Court.

As per FIR, informant Sub-Inspector Manoj Kumar Sirola was on patrolling duty along with other police personnel. On a secret information, they raided the spot and recovered 80 Kg. beef along with cutting tools and other articles. At that time, four persons were present on the spot. Seeing the police, they managed to escape from the spot. Present applicant was identified by two witnesses Nawab and Shazad.

Mr. Rajveer Singh, Advocate, contended that the applicant, aged about 86 years, has been falsely implicated. He was not present at the spot. Nothing was recovered from his possession. Applicant has no criminal history, and, he is a permanent resident of District Haridwar.

On the other hand, Mr. S.T. Bhardwaj, Deputy Advocate General, has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally.

Personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is very precious fundamental right and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Safdar, he will be released on Anticipatory Bail on furnishing his personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer.

Anticipatory Bail Application (No.28 of 2023) stands disposed of accordingly.