‘Bail is the rule’: Why Uttarakhand High Court released 3 men accused under Cow Progeny Act

He was arrested in September 2024 and has been in jail since then.

Justice Alok Kumar Verma of Uttarakhand High Court heard all the three cases and granted bail citing fundamental rights enshrined by the Constitution. (Image enhanced using AI)

“Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused,” the bench said.

The order held that there was no reason to keep the applicant behind bars for an indefinite period.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it concluded that Afzal deserved to be released on bail at this stage.

The bench directed that Afzal be released on furnishing a personal bond along with two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Case 2

On January 3, the court granted anticipatory bail to one Iliyas saying that personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is “very precious fundamental right”.

Ilyas was booked following a police raid and alleged seizure of 85 kilogram of beef before the police could nab the accused.

The order noted that the personal liberty of a person should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative, according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

The court directed that in the event of arrest, Iliyas should be released on anticipatory bail on executing a personal bond of Rs 30,000 with two reliable sureties of the like amount.

The relief was subject to conditions, including regular appearance before the trial court, non-inducement or threat to witnesses, and a restriction on leaving the country without prior permission of the trial court.

The court further clarified that any misuse or violation of the conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.

Iliyas moved the high court after his anticipatory bail plea was rejected by the trial court at Laksar in December 2025. He was booked in 2022 at Laksar Police Station, Haridwar district, under Sections 3 and 5 read with 11 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act, 2007.

According to the prosecution, on November 25, 2022, the police received secret information that Iliyas and two others were allegedly slaughtering a cow in a sugarcane field.

Case 3

On December 30 2025, the court granted bail to one Yunus, who was arrested for a similar offence.

“Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the investigation is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused,” the court said.

According to the prosecution, Haridwar police claimed that on November 18, last year, they received secret information that certain persons were slaughtering a cow near a sugarcane field.

Acting on the tip-off, the police allegedly conducted a raid and found seven persons at the spot. A total of 180.59 kilograms of beef and other articles were stated to have been recovered.

While six persons allegedly managed to flee, Yunus was arrested on the spot. He was booked under Sections 3, 5 read with 11 of the cow progeny law.

The court emphasised that pre-trial detention was not meant to be punitive and found no compelling reason to continue Yunus’ detention at this stage of the proceedings and clarified that the grant of bail was being made without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Allowing the bail application, the order directed the accused to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties.