IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-33168 of 2008 Date of Decision : 28.4.2011 Mohd. Umar @ Billa ….. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ….. Respondent Present : Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. TS Salana, DAG, Punjab, Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the complainant. *** S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The present petition has been filed seeking pre- arrest bail in case FIR No.161 dated 25.10.2008 registered at Police Station Sadar Sangrur for the offences under Sections 295 and 120-B IPC; besides, Sections 4-A, 4-B and 8 of the Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (‘Act’ – for short). FIR has been registered on the complaint of Satish Kumar. It is alleged that cows have been slaughtered in Dashmesh Dhaba owned by Avtar Singh and Gurtej Singh. It is submitted by the complainant that their Cow Protection Organization had been protecting the cows for the last 20 years. On that day i.e. 25.10.2008 they had received a secret information that owner of Dashmesh Dhaba situated in the area of Village Khurana on Sangrur to Bhawanigarh road in connivance with Dilshad Hazi and Imran Hazi residents of Bassi Near Bagra Post Office, Titabi CRM No.M-33168 of 2008 [2] Muzaffarnagar slaughtered the cows in the godown situated behind Dashmesh Dhaba in the night. These people sell beef in U.P. and Delhi. Matloof, Nazir Mazoo presently residing at Dhanola Mandi Bhaika were also with them in this activity. One companion Billa (petitioner) resides near Mannawala Phatak, Malerkotla. Nephew of Dilshad Hazi, namely, Kalu, Sultan and their other brothers reside in Rangeshah Colony near Hadarori, Patiala. To perform all these activities Dilshad Hazi is having his own vehicles. They load cows from Dhanola by taking trucks from the Dhanola Truck Union at `3,000/- per truck. The feelings of the followers of Hindu and Sikh religions are attached with the cows and their feelings have been hurt. In the FIR there is no direct attribution against the petitioner for slaughtering the cows. The petitioner was granted interim bail by this Court on 22.12.2008 which continues. On 21.7.2009, it was submitted by learned counsel for the State that offence under Section 3 of the Act has also been added. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for adjournment to file appropriate application to seek bail under the said provision also. The case was ultimately dismissed for non- prosecution on 6.10.2009. Thereafter, Criminal Misc. No.55321 of 2009 was filed for recalling the order dated 6.10.2009. Notice was issued in the said criminal miscellaneous application and the order dismissing the petition for anticipatory bail for non-prosecution was recalled on 30.11.2009. On 11.12.2009, it was again ordered to be listed as per roster. Learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation and the challan has been filed before the learned trial Court on 3.9.2009. CRM No.M-33168 of 2008 [3] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was summoned in the case after the challan had been filed. It is submitted that the petitioner is appearing before the learned trial Court and he has furnished his regular bail on putting in appearance. In the circumstances, the Crl. Misc. petition has been rendered infructuous and is accordingly dismissed as such. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE April 28, 2011 amit