The Uttarakhand High Court granted bail in a cow slaughter case, observing that keeping the accused in jail for an indefinite period during trial violates personal liberty and serves no punitive or procedural purpose once the investigation is complete.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NAINITAL: The Uttarakhand High Court has granted bail to Afzal, an accused in a case involving alleged cow slaughter and transportation of beef, holding that continued incarceration during trial would amount to an unjustified restriction on personal liberty.
Justice Alok Kumar Verma, while deciding Afzal’s first bail plea, ruled that there was no compelling reason to keep the applicant in custody when the investigation had already concluded and the charge-sheet had been filed.
Case Background
The case arose from Case Crime No. 749 of 2024, registered at Bhagwanpur Police Station, Haridwar, under Sections 3 and 5 read with Section 11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007.
As per the prosecution (the State), on September 24, 2024, police personnel intercepted a motorcycle without a visible front number plate. The vehicle was allegedly carrying a sack containing 20 kilograms of beef. The motorcycle was being driven by Salman, who was arrested on the spot.
During police questioning, Salman allegedly stated that the meat originated from a cow slaughtered by Afzal (also known as Jala) along with several other individuals. Afzal, however, was not present at the scene and was later implicated based solely on this statement.
Arguments Before the Court
Defence Submissions
Counsel for Afzal argued that the prosecution’s case rested entirely on the disclosure statement of a co-accused, without any independent recovery or direct evidence linking the applicant to the alleged offence. It was further submitted that Afzal had no criminal history, was a permanent resident of Haridwar, and therefore posed no risk of absconding.
The defence also highlighted that Afzal had been in custody since January 4, 2025, and that continued detention served no purpose once the investigation was complete.
State’s Opposition
The State opposed the bail plea through the Assistant Government Advocate, maintaining that the allegations were serious in nature and involved violation of statutory provisions relating to cow protection.
Court’s Observations
After examining the material on record, the High Court reiterated the constitutional principle that pre-trial detention is not meant to punish an accused. Justice Verma underscored that denial of bail directly impacts the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court observed that the primary objective of custody during trial is to secure the accused’s appearance before the court, and not to impose a penalty before adjudication of guilt.
Finding no exceptional circumstances warranting further detention, the Court allowed the bail application. Afzal was directed to be released upon furnishing:
- A personal bond, and
- Two solvent sureties of the same amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court.
ALSO READ: Advocate Sues McDonald’s Over Burger Mix-Up At Mumbai Airport: “Ordered Veg, Got Chicken”
Case Title:
Afzal vs State of Uttarakhand
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2082 of 2025
READ ORDER