Justice Sandeep Moudgil, Punjab & Haryana High Court
Cow Slaughter Offence Has Cultural Impact Beyond Legal Breach: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Accused
|Petitioner was accused of participating in the illegal transportation and slaughter of cows.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court while denying anticipatory bail to a man accused in a cow slaughter case observed that such offences carry not just legal consequences but also deep emotional and cultural undertones, owing to the special status of the cow in Indian society.
An anticipatory bail application was filed by petitioner, who was accused of participating in the illegal transportation and slaughter of cows.
A Bench of Justice Sandeep Moudgil held, “The present offence, apart from its legal implications, is laden with emotional and cultural undertones, given the unique status of the cow in Indian society. This Court cannot remain oblivious to the fact that in a pluralistic society like ours, certain acts, while otherwise private, can have severe repercussions on public peace when they offend the deeply held beliefs of a significant population group.”
Advocate Rosi appeared for the Petitioner.
The case pertains to allegations that petitioner, along with others, was involved in transporting two cows to the state of Rajasthan for the purpose of slaughter an act in alleged violation of both the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
Denying his request for anticipatory bail, the Court underscored that the allegations against him indicate a deliberate and knowing breach of the law. The Court further highlighted that such actions reflect a blatant disregard for the legal framework and an insensitivity to the collective sentiments of the larger community.
In assessing the petitioner's background, the Court noted, “It is evident from the material placed on record that the petitioner is not a first time offender. He is alleged to have previously been involved in three other FIRs pertaining to similar offences. In those cases, the petitioner was granted the benefit of bail as a gesture of judicial trust, which appears to have been misused, rather than respected.”
Addressing the broader legal context, the Court clarified that Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) which allows for judicial intervention to prevent misuse of legal processes cannot be interpreted as a mechanism for habitual offenders to shield themselves from the due process of law.
“Anticipatory bail is a discretionary relief, intended to protect innocent individuals from motivated or arbitrary arrest, not to provide sanctuary to those who repeatedly violate the law with impunity,” the Court explained.
The Court added, “The possibility of the petitioner indulging in similar unlawful activities in the future, or tampering with the investigation, cannot be ruled out. Hence, the present petition deserves to be dismissed.”
Cause Title: Aasif v. State Of Haryana, [2025:PHHC:099601]