High CourtsSingle Bench

Yusuf vs State Of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 9 October 2023 · Citation: (2023) 10 UK CK 0033

HON’BLE JUDGES
Alok Kumar Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 379, 411 · Uttarakhand Protection Of Cow Progeny Act, 2007 — Section 3, 11 · Constitution Of India, 1950 — Article 21
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 901 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

13 paragraphs · 462 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 under Section 379, Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 read with Section 11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007 in connection with the Case Crime No.347 of 2023, registered at police station Bhagwanpur, District Haridwar.

2.

As per the First Information Report dated 02.06.2023, informant’s cow was stolen by some unknown person. The First Information Report was registered against the unknown person.

3.

During the investigation, police received an information that the said stolen cow had been kept hidden by the applicant and other persons. Based on that information, police raided the spot. The stolen cow was found tied to a tree. Three of the persons present at the spot managed to escape, while one person, namely, Aas Mohammad alias Ashu, was arrested. The co-accused Aas Mohammad alias Ashu told the police at the time of the arrest that the applicant had fled from the spot.

4.

Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, submits that the applicant is an innocent person. He has not been named in the First Information Report. He was not present at the spot. He has been falsely implicated by the co-accused Aas Mohammad alias Ashu. He is not a previous convict. He is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no chance of his absconding, and, the said offences are triable by Magistrate.

5.

Mr. M.K. Chand, A.G.A., has opposed the Anticipatory Bail Application and submitted that the investigation is still in progress.

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, applicant- Yusuf is directed to be released on Anticipatory Bail, in the event of his arrest, on furnishing his personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount on the following conditions:-

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

(ii) Applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency and he shall make himself available at the time of interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required;

(iii) Applicant shall not leave the country without previous permission of the Trial Court.

8.

It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the 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.901 of 2023) stands disposed of accordingly.