High CourtsSingle Bench

Shamin @ Samin And Ors vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 12 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 JH CK 0061

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Prevention Of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 — Section 11 · Jharkhand Bovine Animals Prohibition Of Slaughter Act, 2005 — Section 12(2) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
A.B. A. No. 5923 Of 2020
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

7 paragraphs · 433 words

Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioners personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioners the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Mosabani P.S. case no. 17 of 2020 registered under Sections 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 and section 12(2) of the Jharkhand Bovine Animals Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were involved in smuggling of bovine animals illegally. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have no concern with the seized bovine animals. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent, as mentioned in paragraph 9 of the anticipatory bail application. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have been implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused persons. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also ready and willing to furnish sufficient security, hence, the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing cash security of Rs. 30,000/- each and furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM, Ghatsila in connection with Mosabani P.S. case no. 17 of 2020 subject to the condition that the petitioners will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.