Anticipatory bail granted on grounds of parity in illegal cattle transportation case involving buffaloes.

On September 10, 2025, police intercepted a vehicle (CG-04 PT-8078) at NH-130, Belpara, allegedly transporting 17 cattle (13 buffaloes, 2 calves, and 2 dead buffaloes) in a cruel manner from Korba to Uttar Pradesh

While the driver fled, co-accused Shahrukh Qureshi was apprehended; the applicant, Emran Qureshi, was subsequently linked to the crime based on memorandum statements

The applicant sought anticipatory bail, asserting innocence and citing that other co-accused—Anish Qureshi, Shahrukh Qureshi, and Shubhan Qureshi—had already been granted regular or anticipatory bail by the High Court

The State opposed the application, citing the applicant's two previous criminal antecedents

Whether the applicant is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, based on the principle of parity and the nature of the alleged offences

The Court primarily applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the grant of anticipatory bail

Substantive charges were invoked under Sections 4, 6, and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 1959, which regulates the slaughter and transportation of agricultural cattle (including buffaloes) and prescribes punishments up to three years

Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960

The Court also applied the principle of parity in bail jurisprudence, which suggests that similarly situated accused persons should be treated equally regarding the grant of liberty

The Court evaluated the facts and circumstances, noting that the offences alleged are not punishable by life imprisonment or terms exceeding ten years

It specifically weighed the applicant’s role against the fact that the "main accused persons" (Anish and Shahrukh Qureshi) and another co-accused (Shubhan Qureshi) had already secured bail through previous orders (MCRC No. 9403/2025, MCRC No. 833/2026, and MCRCA No. 212/2026)

Despite the State's objection regarding the applicant's two criminal antecedents, the Court determined that the material available on record and the requirement of parity outweighed the opposition

The Court found that since the applicant is a permanent resident and unlikely to abscond, the benefit of anticipatory bail was justified subject to stringent conditions

It held that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on a personal bond with one surety, subject to conditions including non-interference with witnesses, regular appearances before the trial court, and a prohibition against committing similar offences in the future

The Court expressly extended the "benefit of parity" to the applicant based on the previous orders granted to co-accused persons