HADISUL NISHA URF HADIMUL NISHA vs State Government — 612/2026

Case under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act Section 3/5/8. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

Bail Application

CNR: UPRB010015602026

Filing Number

1460/2026

Filing Date

09-Mar-2026

Registration No

612/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

3-II- Addl. District and Session Judge

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 23-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

10

Police Station

INHAUNA

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act Section 3/5/8

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HADISUL NISHA URF HADIMUL NISHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.State Government

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Court Decision Summary The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raebareli, granted bail to both applicants—Aleem (32 years) and Hadisul Nisha (46 years)—in a case involving alleged cow slaughter under Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act Sections 3/5/8 and Animal Cruelty Act Section 11(1). The court found significant inconsistencies in the police investigation, including gaps between the alleged incident time (3:30 PM) and the applicants' arrest time (7:20 PM), lack of independent witnesses, and no direct recovery from the accused, leading to the conclusion that bail conditions were satisfied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    II- Addl. District and Session Judge

  4. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District and Session Judge

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 612/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Second Additional Sessions Judge, Raebareli, granted bail to both applicants—Aleem (32 years) and Hadisul Nisha (46 years)—in a case involving alleged cow slaughter under Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act Sections 3/5/8 and Animal Cruelty Act Section 11(1). The court found significant inconsistencies in the police investigation, including gaps between the alleged incident time (3:30 PM) and the applicants' arrest time (7:20 PM), lack of independent witnesses, and no direct recovery from the accused, leading to the conclusion that bail conditions were satisfied. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case