ALEEM vs State Government — 576/2026

Case under The Uttar Pradesh Govadh Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1955 Section 3,5,8. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Bail Application

CNR: UPRB010014302026

Case disposed

Filing Number

1342/2026

Filing Date

25-02-2026

Registration No

576/2026

Registration Date

25-02-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

3-II- Addl. District and Session Judge

Decision Date

16th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

FIR Details

FIR Number

10

Police Station

INHAUNA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

THE UTTAR PRADESH GOVADH NIVARAN ADHINIYAM, 1955 Section 3,5,8
Prevention of cruelty to Animals Act Section 11

Petitioner(s)

ALEEM

Adv. MAHENDRA KUMAR TIWARI

Respondent(s)

State Government

Hearing History

Judge: 3-II- Addl. District and Session Judge

16-03-2026

Disposed

11-03-2026

Hearing

09-03-2026

Hearing

25-02-2026

Hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

16-03-2026
Copy of Order

Court Decision Summary The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raebareli granted bail to both applicants—Aleem and Hadisul Nisha—in a cow slaughter case (Crime No. 10/2026 under Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Animal Cruelty Act). The court found significant discrepancies in the police investigation, including inconsistencies in the timeline of arrest versus investigation start time, lack of independent witnesses to the alleged recovery, and procedural irregularities that cast doubt on the evidence reliability. The applicants were released on personal bonds of ₹50,000 each with strict conditions regarding court attendance and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raebareli granted bail to both applicants—Aleem and Hadisul Nisha—in a cow slaughter case (Crime No. 10/2026 under Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act and Animal Cruelty Act). The court found significant discrepancies in the police investigation, including inconsistencies in the timeline of arrest versus investigation start time, lack of independent witnesses to the alleged recovery, and procedural irregularities that cast doubt on the evidence reliability. The applicants were released on personal bonds of ₹50,000 each with strict conditions regarding court attendance and non-interference with witnesses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Session Judge All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case