JAVED Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 42 dtd. 16/3/2021 registered under Ss. 5/13(2) and 17 of Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamyardhan Act, 2015, Ss. 11, 59, 60 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Ss. 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Rojka Meo, District Nuh, Haryana.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has joined investigation in terms of order passed by this Court dtd. 29/10/2021. Order dtd. 29/10/2021 is as under:-

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and there are also other cases involving the same allegations and therefore, the benefit of anticipatory bail may kindly be declined. Learned counsel for the respondent-State though concedes that the allegations against the petitioner and the co-accused Sakir are identical, who has already been extended the benefit of anticipatory bail except that the petitioner was allegedly driving the vehicle.