'Cow is Integral to India’s Agrarian Ethos': Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Pre-arrest Bail in Cow Slaughter Case

The bench of Justice Sandeep Moudgil, while dismissing the petition of Aasif, observed that anticipatory bail is a discretionary protection designed to safeguard innocent citizens against arbitrary arrest, not a refuge for habitual offenders. The judge emphasized that the allegations in the case strike at the “core of constitutional morality and social order".

Court pointed out that Aasif had faced three similar FIRs earlier and misused the bail granted to him as a gesture of judicial trust, showing a pattern of habitual offending.

"The present offence, apart from its legal implications, is laden with emotional and cultural undertones, given the unique status of the cow in Indian society. This Court cannot remain oblivious to the fact that in a pluralistic society like ours, certain acts, while otherwise private, can have severe repercussions on public peace when they offend the deeply held beliefs of a significant population group," court emphasised.

An FIR under Sections 13(2) of the Haryana Gauvansh Sanrakshan and Gausamvardhan Act, 2015, and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, was registered in April this year at Sadar Nuh police station, after police intercepted a Tata Intra vehicle based on secret information.

Inside, officers found two cows tied in cramped conditions, deprived of food and water. Alongside the animals, police seized a knife, an axe, and other tools allegedly meant for slaughter. The cows, according to the FIR, were being transported from Haryana to Rajasthan for slaughter.

Police apprehended two accused, Tasleem and Aman, at the scene. While Aman was caught driving the vehicle and later secured regular bail, Aasif allegedly fled but was later named in the FIR. The prosecution maintained that Aasif had been a repeat offender, facing at least three earlier cases under similar charges.

During the hearing, Aasif’s counsel argued that he had been falsely implicated and sought parity with Aman, who had already secured bail. The counsel insisted that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and assured full cooperation with investigators.

The State, however, strongly opposed bail. Haryana’s counsel argued that the offence was grave and that Aasif’s criminal record showed a pattern of habitual offending. The State further contended that anticipatory bail could embolden the accused to interfere with witnesses or tamper with evidence.

Court sided with the prosecution. It referred to Supreme Court judgments, notably Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), where it was held that anticipatory bail cannot be extended to those with criminal antecedents. Court also cited the landmark judgment in State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat (2005), which upheld laws prohibiting cow slaughter while stressing the economic and moral value of the animal.

“The cow is not only a pious animal but also an integral part of India’s agrarian economy,” the High Court reiterated, highlighting Article 48 of the Constitution, which directs the state to prohibit slaughter of cows and calves, and Article 51A(g), which imposes a fundamental duty on citizens to show compassion to all living beings.

Court noted that while liberty is a cherished constitutional value, it cannot serve as a cover for repeated violations of law. “The right to bail is not to be confused with the right to impunity,” he remarked, warning that acts like cow slaughter, when repeated and deliberate, have the potential to disturb public peace in a pluralistic society.

Holding that Aasif’s conduct indicated recidivism and that granting him bail could encourage further offences, court dismissed the anticipatory bail petition.

Case Title: Aasif vs State of Haryana

Order Date: August 5, 2025

Bench: Justice Sandeep Moudgil