High CourtsSingle Bench

Ikrar And Others vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 4 November 2025 · Citation: (2025) 11 UK CK 0118

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Uttarakhand Protection Of Cow Progeny Act, 2007 — Section 3, 5, 11 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1200 Of 2025
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 471 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 374 of 2025, registered at Police Station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar under Section 3, Section 5 read with Section 11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007.

2.

Learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee, District Haridwar dismissed the Anticipatory Bail Application of the applicant on 30.10.2025.

3.

According to the First Information Report dated 23.10.2025, the police received a secret information on 22.10.2025 that Ikrar, Usman, Raees (applicants) and Rijwan are slaughtering a cow and a bull. The police raided the spot and recovered 100 kg. beef and other articles. The informer, seeing the persons present at the spot, told the police that they are Ikrar, Usman, Raees (applicants) and Rijwan. The said persons managed to escape from the spot.

4.

Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.

5.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated by the police. They were not present on the spot. The alleged beef was not recovered from their possession. Applicants have no criminal history. They are permanent residents of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of their absconding.

6.

Mr. Akshay Latwal, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the anticipatory bail application orally.

7.

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.

8.

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present Application, filed for anticipatory bail, is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants Ikrar, Usman and Raees, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/ - and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, by each one of them, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions: -

(i) Applicants shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment;

(iii) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case;

(iv) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court.

9.

It is clarified that if the applicants misuse or violate any of the conditions, imposed upon them, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.