IMRAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

(2.) The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 345 of 2023, under Ss. 3/5A/8 of UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 an 269 IPC, Police Station- Raya, District - Mathura.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. It is further submitted that the Police has shown false recovery of beef however nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no independent witness to the said recovery. No forensic science laboratory report which confirms that the substance allegedly recovered is prohibited meat has been produced by the prosecution. Prosecution evidence does not connect the applicant with the alleged offence. He further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history.It is stated that after taking note of entire facts and circumstances of the case, co-accused, namely, Raja, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dtd. 19/12/2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 51114 of 2023 . Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail.It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, he may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 19/9/2023 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.