Chhattisgarh HC Denies Bail In Cattle Case, Citing Poor Condition Of 13 Cattle And Undisclosed Similar 2025 Case

The applicant sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 08/2026. Police had found an abandoned pick-up vehicle and 13 cattle tied nearby in poor condition; the vehicle’s owner stated during investigation that he had sold it to the applicant.

The applicant argued that the cattle were for agricultural use, disputed the basis for implicating him, and relied on his custody since 11 August 2026 and the likely delay in trial. The State opposed bail, asserting that the applicant had failed to disclose a similar pending case from 2025.

The Court heard the parties and perused the case diary.

The application was made under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The alleged offences were under Sections 281 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 4, 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, and Sections 11(1)(A) and 11(1)(D) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

The Court stated that criminal antecedents are relevant to assessing the likelihood of compliance with bail conditions, a pattern of similar or grave offending, and risks of flight, evidence tampering, obstruction, or witness intimidation.

It also relied on Deepak Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, (2022) 8 SCC 559, noting that the Supreme Court had cancelled bail there on the ground of the accused’s previous antecedents.

The Court considered the applicant’s claim that the cattle were intended for agricultural purposes against the recovery circumstances and the medical report, which indicated that the cattle were not in good health. It held that transport for slaughter could not be ruled out at the bail stage.

The Court also considered the State’s assertion that the applicant had a pending, undisclosed case of a similar nature from 2025 and treated that antecedent as indicating a persistent pattern and risk of repetition.

Relying on Deepak Yadav, the Court declined to grant bail.