High CourtsSingle Bench

Imran Alias Tailor vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 10 November 2025 · Citation: (2025) 11 UK CK 0043

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. 1202 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 · 499 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

This Application has been filed for anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.376 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 rejected the Anticipatory Bail Application (No.548 of 2025) of the applicant on 30. 10.2025.

3.

According to the First Information Report, the informer of the police informed on 23.10.2025 that Imran alias Tailor (applicant) Chhota, Ikrar and Abdul Rahman alias Dulla are slaughtering a cow. The police raided the spot. The police noticed that four persons were present on the spot. The police recovered 210 kg. beef and other articles. They arrested two persons Abdul Rahman alias Dulla and Ikrar, while two persons managed to escape from the spot. The arrested persons told the police that they have slaughtered a cow with Imran alias Tailor (applicant) and Chhota alias Dalla.

4.

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

5.

Mr. Rajveer Singh, Advocate has contended that the applicant is an innocent person. He has been falsely implicated by the police and the arrested co-accused persons. He was not present on the spot. He was not involved in the said offence. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding, and, he has no criminal antecedents.

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 applicant-Imran alias Tailor, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer, subject to the following conditions: -

(i) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

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

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

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

9.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions, imposed upon him, the prosecution agency will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.