Anticipatory Bail Granted Where Accusation Rests Solely on Co-Accused’s Memorandum Statement Without Corroborative Evidence

The applicant sought anticipatory bail following the registration of an FIR (Crime No. 108/2026) at Police Station Kotra Road.

On April 6, 2026, police intercepted a Scorpio vehicle transporting six cattle illegally.

A co-accused, Maksood, provided a memorandum statement alleging that the applicant loaded the cattle onto the vehicle under the instructions of the owner, Jahangir.

The applicant contended he was a daily wage labourer with no knowledge of the illegal purpose of the transport and was falsely implicated solely based on the co-accused's statement.

The State opposed the bail, arguing the applicant actively participated in the cruel and unlawful transportation.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given that his implication is primarily based on a co-accused's memorandum statement.

The court applied Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (successor to Section 438 CrPC) regarding anticipatory bail.

Substantively, the charges involved Sections 4 and 6 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattles Preservation Act, 2004, and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

The court observed the evidentiary principle that a memorandum statement of a co-accused has limited evidentiary value at the pre-trial stage.

The court found that the seizure of the six cattle occurred from the possession of the co-accused, Maksood, and not from the applicant.

It noted that the applicant was not apprehended at the scene and his naming in the memorandum statement by Maksood did not, by itself, establish "conscious involvement" in the illegal transportation.

The court took into account the applicant’s status as a labourer allegedly hired only for loading, the lack of previous criminal antecedents, and the personal circumstances regarding his pregnant wife.

Consequently, the court determined that the material on record did not warrant custodial interrogation or denial of bail.

It held that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released upon executing a personal bond and a surety, subject to conditions: (a) non-interference with witnesses; (b) cooperation with the trial; (c) regular appearance before the trial court; (d) submission of Aadhaar verification; and (e) refraining from committing similar offences in the future.