MAHAMADHANEEF GULAMRASUL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State. With the consent of learned advocates on both the sides, the matter is heard today finally.

(2.) This petition has been preferred essentially seeking relief to release the muddamal vehicle being Eeco car, registration No.GJ-35-B-1855, on suitable terms and conditions.

(3.) Mr. Jaydeep H.Sindhi, learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the vehicle was Eeco Car, where the vehicle would have an open space from the rear side and in villages Mr. Sindhi, submitted that for internal agriculture purpose, the animals are transported by the personal vehicles and as per the FIR itself, the seats of the car were removed and there was enough space for Ox in the car, and, thus he states that no offence under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act , 2011 nor under Gujarat Animal Preservation Amendment Act, 2017, could be made out.