Govind Singh & Another v. State Of Haryana
On 20.11.2025, this Court had passed the following order:- "1. Prayer in this petition 2023 is for grant of anticipa dated 08.08.2025, under S Haryana Gauvansh Sanraks 2015 and under Section 11 Animals Act, 1960, register District Kurukshetra.
2. The parties have been h been perused.
4. Brief facts of the pr 08.08.2025 at about 05:00 am other police officials was Station Shahabad in connect he received an information f under Section 482 of BNSS, atory bail in case FIR No.471, Sections 5, 13(2), 17 of the shan and Gausamvardhan Act, 1 of Prevention of Cruelty to red at Police Station Shahbad, heard and material on file has rosecution case are that on m, SI Rajesh Kumar alongwith present at Main Gate, Police tion with patrolling duty, when from the Moharrer, Police
Station Shahabad that one Canter No.RJ-060GD-8789 has been apprehended, while it was carrying cows for slaughtering. Thereafter, the police party reached at the spot, where Mukesh Kumar, member of the Gorakshak Dal met them. The Canter was loaded with 13 cows and 3 calves and said Mukesh Kumar disclosed that they had captured the said Canter at about 3:00 am. The driver and the other occupants of the Canter had run away and the cows were being transported for slaughtering purposes and he sought action against the unknown persons.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners have been falsely implicated. Petitioner No.1 was the driver of the said canter and petitioner No.2 was the conductor and they were transporting the cows, after having purchased the same from one Vinod Kumar, resident of Alwar, against receipt (Annexure P-5) dated 07.08.2025. The cattle were not being transported for the purpose of slaughtering.
Learned counsel further contended that they had stopped the canter to check the tyres when the complainant and his team members reached there and misbehaved with them. On apprehending danger to their lives, they ran away from the spot. Nothing is to be recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel next contended that petitioners are ready to join the investigation and to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by the Court and benefit of anticipatory bail be extended in favour of the petitioners.
6. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the bail and argued that petitioners does not deserve the concession of bail in view of the gravity of the offence.
7. Adjourned to 20.01.2026. Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in the event of their arrest, they shall be admitted to ad-interim bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS [erstwhile Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.]:- i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii) that the petitioners 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;
iv) such other condition as may be imposed under subsection (3) of Section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section."
3.
Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the aforementioned order, the petitioners have not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioners to appear, they shall make themselves available without demur. 4.
Learned State counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioners and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation. 5.
In view of the above and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and the order dated 20.11.2025 granting interim bail to them, is hereby made absolute, subject to compliance of conditions as specified under Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023.
6.
However, it is made clear that if the petitioners fail to join and cooperate with the investigating agency as and when required, the State would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of the present anticipatory bail granted to them.