Allahabad High Court
Taukeer Ahmad @ Salman & Another vs State Of U.P. & Another on 10 February, 2021
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1770 of 2021
Applicant :- Taukeer Ahmad @ Salman & Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail as the applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with F.I.R./Case Crime No.38 of 2021, under Sections-3/5/8 of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, Police Station Gosaiganj, District Sultanpur.
3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that according to the first information report the vehicle was intercepted by the police wherein it is alleged that about 10 quintals of cow meat was loaded on the said vehicle and six people were apprehended on the spot. On further interrogation of the persons apprehended on the spot, the accused-applicant has been implicated on their statement. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the first information report is false and the applicant has been falsely named in the said incident. He has further submitted that even as per the material available on record there is no assertion or finding that the meat which was seized was cow meat as provided under U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act.
4. Learned A.G.A. though opposes the application for anticipatory bail but could not place on record any report of the medical authority which can identify the meat to be a cow meat.
5.After considering the rival submissions, this Court finds that there is a case registered /about to be registered against the applicants. It cannot be definitely said when the police may apprehend them. After lodging of F.I.R. the arrest can be made by the police at will. The courts have repeatedly held that arrest should be the last option for the police and it should be restricted to those exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative or his custodial interrogation is required. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violation of human rights. In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1994 SC 1349, the Apex Court has referred to the third report of National Police Commission wherein it is mentioned that arrests by the police in India is one of the chief sources of corruption in the police. The report suggested that, by and large, nearly 60 percent of the arrests were either unnecessary or unjustified and that such unjustified police action accounted for 43.2 percent of expenditure of the jails. Personal liberty is a very precious fundamental rights and it should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative. According to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the peculiar case the arrest of an accused should be made.
6. Hence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
7. In view of above, the application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed.
8. Till filing of the charge sheet in the case, accused-applicants, namely, Taukeer Ahmad alias Salman and Mohd. Arman, in the event of their arrest in connection with aforesaid case crime, shall forthwith be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting officer/Investigating Officer/ S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-
(i) That the accused-applicants shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;
(ii) That the accused-applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and
(iii) That the accused-applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
9. The papers regarding bail submitted to the police officer on behalf of the accused/applicants shall form part of the case diary and would be submitted to the court concerned along with same at the time of submission of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.
10. Under Part-III, Chapter- XVIII, Rule-18[3(a)] of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (amended), a copy of the bail application along with its enclosures be provided to the learned A.G.A. by learned counsel for applicants, within two days from today, without fail.
Order Date :- 10.2.2021 (Alok Mathur, J.)
RKM.
