On 20.11.2025, this Court had passed the following order:- “1. Prayer in this petition under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023 is for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.471, dated 08.08.2025, under Sections 5, 13(2), 17 of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015 and under Section 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, registered at Police Station Shahbad, District Kurukshetra.

2. The parties have been heard and material on file has been perused.

4. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 08.08.2025 at about 05:00 am, SI Rajesh Kumar alongwith other police officials was present at Main Gate, Police Station Shahabad in connection with patrolling duty, when he received an information from the Moharrer, Police Station Shahabad that one Canter No.RJ-060GD-8789 has been apprehended, while it was carrying cows for slaughtering. Thereafter, the police party reached at the spot, where Mukesh Kumar, member of the Gorakshak Dal met them. The Canter was loaded with 13 cows and 3 calves and said Mukesh Kumar disclosed that they had captured the said Canter at about 3:00 am. The driver and the other occupants of the Canter had run away and the cows were being transported for slaughtering purposes and he sought action against the unknown persons.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that petitioners have been falsely implicated. Petitioner No.1 was the driver of the said canter and petitioner No.2 was the conductor and they were transporting the cows, after having purchased the same from one Vinod Kumar, resident of Alwar, against receipt (Annexure P-5) dated 07.08.2025. The cattle were not being transported for the purpose of slaughtering. Learned counsel further contended that they had stopped the canter to check the tyres when the complainant and his team members reached there and misbehaved with them. On apprehending danger to their lives, they ran away from the spot. Nothing is to be recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel next contended that petitioners are ready to join the investigation and to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by the Court and benefit of anticipatory bail be extended in favour of the petitioners.

6. On the other hand, learned State counsel has opposed the bail and argued that petitioners does not deserve the concession of bail in view of the gravity of the offence.

7. Adjourned to 20.01.2026. Meanwhile, the petitioners are directed to join the investigation and in the event of their arrest, they shall be admitted to ad-interim bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer, subject to the following conditions as envisaged under Section 482(2) of the BNSS [erstwhile Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.]:-

i) that the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

ii) that the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

iii) that the petitioners shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court;

iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub- section (3) of Section 480, as if the bail were granted under that section.”

3. Learned counsel submits that in pursuance of the afore- mentioned order, the petitioners have not only joined investigation but also fully cooperated with the investigating agency. He further submits that in case the investigating agency requires the petitioners to appear, they shall make themselves available without demur.

4. Learned State counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer affirms the factum of joining the investigation by the petitioners and cooperating with the investigating agency. He also submits that at this stage, the petitioners are not required for further custodial interrogation.

5. In view of the above and withou