VASIYA ANGIYA BARELA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order seeks to dispose of criminal revision appellant filed under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which has been preferred against the order passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Sendhwa, District Badwani pronounced in Criminal Appeal No.64/2018 on 10.05.2019 whereby the learned Judge has affirmed the conviction of the applicant under the provisions of Section 11 (d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960; Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh Krashik Pashu Parikshan Adhiniyam and Section 9 of the Madhya Pradesh Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Niyam, 2012 in Criminal Case No.504/2017 dated 21.03.2018 and sentencing the applicant as under :- Offence under Section Conviction and fine Sentence in default of fine 11 (d) of the Fine of Rs.50/- 03 days SI Prevention of Cruelty (Fine deposited) to Animals Act, 1960 10 of the Madhya 1 year RI and fine of 03 days SI Pradesh Krashik Rs.1,000/- Pashu Parikshan (Fine deposited) Adhiniyam 9 of the Madhya 1 year RI and fine of 03 days SI Pradesh Govansh Rs.5,000/- Vadh Pratishedh (Fine deposited) Niyam, 2012

(2.) The facts of the prosecution were that on 23.06.2017 M.S.Dawar, the then Station House Officer posted at Police Station Niwali, Tehsil Sendhwa had gone for routine patrolling along with his staff. During the course of patrolling, a secret information was received by him that 6 bullocks tied by a rope are being transported for slaughtering from Ghodlyapani to Maharashtra. A trap was thus laid. It was noticed that a man had tied up 6 bullocks with a rope and was assaulting them while carrying them. On seeing the police officers, the said man tried to run away leaving behind his bulls but was caught on the spot. He confessed that he was carrying the bulls for slaughtering to Maharashtra. He was arrested and bulls were seized from him. FIR was lodged and investigation was set in motion. After necessary formalities, charge-sheet was filed.

(3.) The applicant abjured his guilt and trial proceedings were initiated. The prosecution examined one independent witness and four police witnesses. After appreciating the evidence, the charges were found proved which were affirmed by the revisional Court as aforesaid, against which this revision application has been filed.