Khalid Ahmad v. State of U.P.), as well as order dated
Case Details
Judgement Reserved On 25.04.2022 Judgement Delivered On 11.05.2022 Court No. - 41 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26850 of 2021 Applicant :- Khalid Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J. 1. Heard Sri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. This criminal misc. application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the accused-applicant to quash the order dated 01.11.2021, passed by Special Judge/ SC/ST Act, Chandauli, in Criminal Revision No.57 of 2021 (Khalid Ahmad Vs. State of U.P.), as well as order dated 18.08.2021, passed by District Magistrate, District Chandauli, in Case No.00246 of 2021 (State Vs. Nafees Alam and others), under section 5(A) of Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act, 1955, arising out from Case Crime No.22 of 2021, under sections 3/5A/5B/8 Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act and section 11 of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station Saiyad Raja, District Chandauli.
Legal Reasoning
3. On 11.02.2021 an FIR was lodged by Sub-Inspector, Jai Prakash Yadav, in which it is alleged that on 11.02.2021 he intercepted the Vehicle No.U.P. 72T 1937 and recovered 17 cows progeny, which were being taken for slaughtering. The vehicle was seized. A report under section 5(A)7 of U.P. Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act was presented by the Police Station Saiyad Raja, District Chandauli, to the District Magistrate, Chandauli, and the District Magistrate, Chandauli, by the impugned order dated 18.08.2021 rejected the release application of the applicant and confiscated the impugned vehicle. Aggrieved with this the applicant preferred a criminal revision, which has also been dismissed.
Legal Reasoning
4. Contentions of learned counsel for the applicant are that applicant is the registered owner of the vehicle. Applicant is not connected with any crime. He has not committed any offence. He was not present on the spot or on the vehicle and he has no concern with cows progeny. Only being owner of the vehicle he has been made an accused during investigation of the case. The applicant has sent his vehicle for delivery of food grain to Sasaram and driver and cleaner for their own profit, without informing the applicant allegedly carried animals in the vehicle. The applicant has purchased the vehicle on loan and except the vehicle there is no source of income of the applicant. All the documents of the vehicle are complete. Applicant is not indulged in transportation of the animals or in its slaughtering, directly or indirectly. If the vehicle is not released in favour of the applicant, he will suffer tremendous financial loss. Both the impugned orders are against the mandate given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of 'Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai Vs. Gujrat State' 2002(10) SCC Page 283. Both the impugned orders are illegal, arbitrary and against the settled principle of law. Learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance on following two rulings of this Court:- "(i) "Vikash Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and Another", passed in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.33012 of 2019, decided on 22.01.2020. (ii) "Mohd. Laik Vs. State of U.P. And 3 Others", passed in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.20503 of 2021, decided on 27.10.2021." 5. Learned AGA for the State contended that the vehicle was seized by the police while it was transporting the cows progeny which were carried out of the State for slaughtering. On a report of Police Station Saiyad Raja, District Chandauli, the District Magistrate, Chandauli, after hearing the applicant, by the impugned order dated 18.08.2021 has confiscated the aforesaid vehicle, under the provisions of section 5(A)7 of U.P. Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act. There is no illegality in the impugned order. The learned revisional court has also appreciated the entire material on record and finding no merit, has rightly dismissed the revision. 6. The impugned vehicle No.U.P. 72T 1937 is involved in Case Crime No.22 of 2021, under sections 3/5A/5B/8 Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act and section 11 of Animal of Cruelty Act. It is undisputed that applicant is the registered owner of the aforesaid vehicle and all the documents are valid. Prosecution version is that said vehicle was used for transporting the cows progeny, which were being taken to West Bengal via Bihar for slaughtering. These averments of the FIR are based on the statements given by the driver and cleaner of the vehicle, who have been arrested by the police. They are co-accused in this case. The vehicle has been seized within the jurisdiction of Police Station Saiyad Raja, District Chandauli, within State of U.P. 7. In this regard the relevant provision of section 5(A) (1) and (7) of U.P. Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act, 1955 is as follows:- "[5A. Regulation on transport of cow, etc. - (1) No person shall transport or offer for transport or cause to be transported any cow, or bull or bullock, the slaughter whereof in any place in Uttar Pradesh is punishable under this Act, from any place within the State to any place outside the State, except under a permit issued by an officer authorised by the State Government in this behalf by notified order and except in accordance with the terms and conditions of such permit." "(7) The vehicle by which the beef or cow and its progeny is transported in violation of the provisions of this Act and the relevant rules, shall be confiscated and seized by the law enforcement officers. The concerned District Magistrate/Commissioner of Police will do all proceedings of confiscation and release, as the case may be." 8. It is clear from the aforesaid provision that permit is required only when the cow, or bull or bullock, are being transported from any place out side the State. No permit is required for transportation within the State. Further the District Magistrate, is empowered to confiscate the vehicle involved by which cows and its progenies are transported, in violation of the provisions of this Act. The concerned District Magistrate has been authorized to do all provision of confiscation and release. 9. According to allegations of the FIR the co-accused arrested on the spot have told the police that cows progeny were being transported to West Bengal via Bihar. So prosecution case is based on the statement of the co- accused. It will not be proper to make any comments at this stage on the admissibility of such evidence. Where cows progeny were being transported to other State for slaughtering is a question to be decided at the time of trial after evidence. At this stage it cannot be presumed that cows progeny were being transported in violation of the provision of this Act. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunder Bhai Amba Lal Desai (supra) emphasized the exigency of release of public carrier in favour of the owners after taking appropriate security." 10. The learned District Magistrate, Chandauli has failed to appreciate the aforesaid factual and legal position and without considering the legal provision has rejected the release application of the applicant and has passed the order for confiscation, which is perverse, arbitrary and illegal. The learned revisional court has also failed to appreciate the legal points involved and has failed to exercise its jurisdiction while dismissing the revision. 11. The criminal misc. application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. 12. Order dated 01.11.2021, passed by Special Judge/ SC/ST Act, Chandauli, in Criminal Revision No.57 of 2021 (Khalid Ahmad Vs. State of U.P.), as well as order dated 18.08.2021, passed by District Magistrate, District Chandauli(opposite party no.2), in Case No.00246 of 2021 (State Vs. Nafees Alam and others), under section 5(A) of Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act, 1955, Case Crime No.22 of 2021, under sections 3/5A/5B/8 Cow Slaughter (Prevention) Act and section 11 of Animal Cruelty Act, Police Station Saiyad Raja, District Chandauli, are hereby set- aside. 13. The impugned vehicle No.U.P. 72T 1937 be released in favour of the applicant on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.5 lacs and one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Judicial Magistrate. Applicant will also file an undertaking that he will not sell or dispose of the vehicle during course of trial and will produce it as and when required by the trial court. Order Date :- 11.5.2022 VKG Digitally signed by VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA Date: 2022.05.11 14:30:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad