Anticipatory bail refused in Chandigarh beef-transport case
Chandigarh Police booked a meat trader for allegedly carrying 50 kg of beef on a scooter and added the cow-slaughter law after lab testing. The accused sought anticipatory bail saying the meat was buffalo flesh with purchase slips. The High Court refused pre-arrest protection on 19 January 2026.
This page records what the cited court records say happened. Findings belong to the court or authority that made them; this register adds none of its own. Names of private individuals are withheld unless a naming gate clears them.
How we verify →Anticipatory bail stands refused as of 19.01.2026; investigation and trial to continue.
What happened
The High Court recorded that the case began as FIR No.106 dated 19.07.2025 at Police Station Sector 34 for an offence under Section 299 BNS, and that Section 8 of the Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 was added after testing.
The High Court recorded the prosecution claim that 50 kgs of beef was found in the vehicle, a scooter, after a tip to a Gau Raksha Dal office-bearer.
The High Court recorded that the person at the spot claimed the meat was buffalo flesh and produced purchase slips from sellers in Malerkotla and Saharanpur, and that a sample was sent to the National Meat Research Institute, Hyderabad and reported as Bos indicus (Bull/Ox).
The High Court held that anticipatory bail is an exceptional remedy, that no special hardship was shown, that custodial questioning was needed to trace slaughter, supply and buyers, and ordered that the petition stands dismissed.
What the record says
“It is the case of prosecution that 50 kgs of Beef was found in the said vehicle.”
[name withheld] vs State of U.T. Chandigarh, CRM-M-72360-2025, order dated 19.01.2026 — read the full text
No complaining victim
Possessing, transporting or selling beef for food involves no complaining victim, force or fraud, and was criminalised only under the cattle-preservation law.
What we could not confirm
Full text was accessed via excerpt; no Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, theft, or violence charge appeared in the accessible excerpt.