NABAIL/11707/2026 of ARVIND YADAV Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 4 November 2026

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0027 of 2026, under Sections 3/5A/5B/8 of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Section 109(1) BNS, Police Station- Kandwa, District Chandauli, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the police arrested two co-accused, namely Kamlesh Bind and Sailendra Bind, who were allegedly transporting five animals, stated to be cows or their progeny, in a Bolero pickup bearing registration no. UP 65 JT 3964. The Bolero vehicle in question was stated to be registered in the name of Dhanna Kumar. Dhanna Kumar has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 4526 of 2026. The co-accused Dhanna Kumar claims to have sold the vehicle to the applicant on 23.12.2025. The other co- accused, Alakh Niranjan Gupta, whose name surfaced during the investigation, has also been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in NABAIL No. 11117 of 2026. The applicant has a criminal history of four cases but he is not a previous convict. He is on bail in three cases, and in the fourth case, which is under the Gangsters Act, the applicant is contemplating his legal remedies. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rahul Yadav, Sanjeev Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Arvind Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)

4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has contended that the applicant is a repeat offender. The applicant has two other cases under the Cow Slaughter Act to his credit, he may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that the applicant was not named in the FIR.

5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

6. The applicant is not named in the FIR. No meat or carcass was recovered from the Bolero pickup and only live animals are stated to have been recovered. Other than the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no direct evidence to indicate that animals in question were being transported for the purpose of slaughter. The criminal history of the applicant has been satisfactorily explained and in the opinion of this Court, there is least likelihood of the applicant repeating any such offence in the near future. Co-accused Dhanna Kumar and Alakh Niranjan Gupta have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

7. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed.

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Arvind Yadav, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:-

i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

ii. that the applicant 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 NABAIL No. 11707 of 2026

officer;

iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness;

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. November 5, 2026 S.A. NABAIL No. 11707 of 2026

(Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SALMAN AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad