ARUN PRASANNA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is member of Managing Committee of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals constituted by the District Collector, Chennai vide Roc.No.C2/38263/2009, dated 14.11.2012 and is interested in the safety of animals in question. The petitioner and the defacto complainant have lodged complaint on 22.12.2012 before the 1st respondent police. Pursuant to which 1st respondent police registered a case in Cr.No.1399 of 2012 u/s 11(1) D and H of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, and seized the cattle that were being transported illegally by the 2nd respondent/accused by name DurgavaraPrasad Tamrapu, who is the owner of the cattle.

(2.) The 2nd respondent filed an application before the Court below for interim custody of the cattle and after hearing the defacto complainant and accused, the learned Judicial Magistrate has inclined to to deliver interim custody of 15 cows along with their calves to the 2nd respondent on the following conditions:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the provisions of PCA Act, the accused/owner is not entitled to take custody of the animals, that under the Transport of Cattle Rules, every consignment of cattle should bear the name of consignor and the consignee, but in this case the trucks did not carry the name of the consignor and consignee, that the cattle that were being illegally transported did not have necessary certificate from a veterinarian about its fitness to undertake to travel and that the animals are under medical treatment and no prejudice will be caused to the respondents if interim custody is granted to the petitioner.