S. MURALIDHARAN Vs. NOGARAJ AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Criminal Revision Cases arise out of the same facts viz., transportation of cattle in connection with the cases registered in Cr.No.555 of 2013 in case of Crl.R.C.Nos.505/2013, 1274 to 1276/2013; Cr.No.29 of 2013 in case of Crl.R.C.Nos. 766 to 769 of 2013; Cr.No. 336 of 2013 in case of Crl.R.C.Nos.1150 and 1154 of 2013; Cr.No. 299 of 2013 in case of Crl.R.C.No.1492 of 2013; and Cr.No. 322 of 2013 in case of Crl.R.C.No.294 of 2014 and hence, all these revision cases are taken up together for common disposal and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) Crl.R.C.No. 505/2013 and Crl.R.C.Nos.1274 to 1276 of 2013 have been filed by the defacto complainant/Member, People for Cattle in India, against the allowing of the petitions in Crl.M.P.Nos.4384, 4385, 4386, 4387 of 2013, by common order dated 06.04.2013, seeking for return of cattle viz., 103 cows. Crl.R.C.Nos. 766 to 769 of 2013 have been filed by the defacto complainant/Member, Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, against the allowing of the petitions in Crl.M.P.Nos.778, 779, 781 and 780 of 2013, by common order dated 02.03.2013, seeking for return of cattle viz., 124 buffaloes. Crl.R.C.Nos. 1150 and 1154 of 2013 have been filed by the defacto complainant/President, People for Cattle in India, against the allowing of the petitions in Crl.M.P.Nos.1942 and 1947 of 2013, by common order dated 03.09.2013, seeking for return of cattle viz., 230 buffaloes. Crl.R.C.No. 1492 of 2013 has been filed by the defacto complainant/Blue Cross of India against the allowing of the petition in Crl.M.P.No.1972 of 2013, by order dated 03.09.2013, seeking for return of cattle viz., 29 buffaloes. Crl.R.C.No. 294 of 2014 has been filed by the defacto complainant/President, People for Cattle in India, against the allowing of the petition in Crl.M.P.No.421 of 2014, by order dated 07.02.2014, seeking for return of cattle viz., 26 (25 bulls & 1 male bull calf).

(3.) The case of the petitioners/defacto complainants is that the petitioners' organisation are interested in the safety of the animals in question. The defacto complainants are alleged to have intercepted the vehicles and enquired the drivers and owners of cattle and they came to know that the accused were transporting the cattle to other Districts. In these cases, huge numbers of cattle were involved and they were kept jam packed and therefore, they sustained grievous injuries. They were not provided with fodder or water. The respective defacto complainants lodged complaints before the second respondents, based on which, cases were registered against the first respondents under Sections 41 and 102 Cr.P.C., then altered to Section 11(a) of Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act. After registration of the cases, the owners of cattle preferred petitions before the concerned Magistrates seeking for return of cattle belonging to them. The concerned Magistrates allowed the petitions. Aggrieved against the same, these Criminal Revision Cases are filed by the defacto complainants.