LALJIBHAI GOBARBHAI BHUNDIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Patadiya on behalf of the applicant, learned APP Ms.Mehta for the respondent State and learned Advocate Mr.Dhruvik Patel for respondent No.3.

(2.) By way of this application, the applicant has prayed for release of his vehicle being Mahindra Bolero Maxi Truck Plus bearing Registration No.GJ-3-BV-6828 seized in connection with an FIR being C. R. No.11213015200202/2020 registered with Gondal City Police Station, Rajkot for the offence punishable under Ss. 6(A), 6(B) of the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act, 2011 and Sec. 11(D)(F)(G) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act , 1960.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr.Patadiya would submit that as such upon the vehicle being seized by the Investigating Officer in connection with the FIR referred to herein above, the applicant had initially approached the learned Second Additional Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Gondal for releasing of the vehicle under Sec. 451 of Cr. P.C., and in view of the bar to release of vehicle in the concerned Act, the learned Magistrate had refused to release the vehicle in question. The said order had been challenged before the Revisional Court being the learned 9 th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gondal, Rajkot, and vide order dtd. 13/10/2020 even the Revisional Court, relying upon the statutory bar against release of vehicle as found in the Gujarat Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act, 2017, had refused to interfere with the decision of the learned Judicial Magistrate.