High CourtsSingle Bench

Sakib Ali vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 7 August 2023 · Citation: (2023) 08 UK CK 0047

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Uttarakhand Protection Of Cow Progeny Act, 2007 — Section 3, 5, 11 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 651 of 2023
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

10 paragraphs · 393 words

Alok Kumar Verma, J

1.

Present Application has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of Anticipatory Bail in connection with First Information Report No.379 of 2023, registered at police station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun under Section 3/5/11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007.

2.

As per First Information Report, informant Mahaveer Singh, Sub-Inspector, was present on night checking duty along with other police personnel. On a secret information, they raided the spot. At that time, the persons present at that place were preparing to slaughter the cow by taking each other’s name Sakib (present applicant), Sameer and Soni. Seeing the police, they managed to escape from the spot. 200 kg. of beef and two knives were recovered from the spot.

3.

Heard Mr. Ravindra Singh Rawat, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, learned AGA with Mr. P.S. Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State.

4.

Mr. Ravindra Singh Rawat, Advocate, contended that the applicant was not present on the spot. Nothing was recovered from his possession. He has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He has not been convicted by any Court. He is a permanent resident of District Dehradun.

5.

On the other hand, Mrs. Manisha Rana Singh, A.G.A., has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application orally.

6.

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.

7.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant Sakib Ali, 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 with the condition that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of this case.

8.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates the said condition, imposed upon him, the concerned authority will be free to move the Court for cancellation of the anticipatory bail.

9.

Anticipatory Bail Application (No.651 of 2023) stands disposed of accordingly.