IDRISH Vs. ASHOK MALIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed this criminal revision against the order dated 8.3.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby the orders dated 31.1.2006 and 4.2.2006 passed by the JMIC, Faridabad releasing the custody of the bulls on supardari to the petitioners have been set aside and the custody of the bulls is ordered to be handed over to Gopal Gaushala where they are being fed since the day of their recovery.

(2.) IN this case, during the intervening night of 15/16.1.2006, the police officials of Police Station Sadar Ballabgarh intercepted 59 bulls and in that regard FIR No. 28 dated 16.1.2006 was registered under Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty of Animals Act, 1860. Similarly on that very night, 30 bulls were intercepted by the police officials of Police Station City Ballabgarh and in that regard FIR No. 37 dated 16.1.2006 was registered under that very Act. On application filed by the petitioners, 30 bulls in case FIR No. 37 were ordered to be released to them on supardari. On revision filed by the President, Goraksha Sangharsh Sewa Samiti, Faridabad, the orders dated 31.1.2006 and 4.2.2006 passed by the trial Court were set aside and the custody of the bulls was handed over to Gopal Gaushala where they are being fed since the day of their recovery.

(3.) IN this case, the revisional Court has observed that the bulls in question were being carried from Haryana to Uttar Pradesh without valid permit and they were being taken for the purpose of slaughtering. Further a complaint filed by respondent No. 1 under Section 156(3) Cr. P.C. for registration of a case under Sections 3, 4(a), 4(b) read with Section 8 of the Punjab Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 4(b) read with Section 9 of the Haryana Prohibition of Cow Slaughter Act, is pending for adjudication. It has been further noticed by the revisional Court that when the bulls were taken into custody, they were treated with cruelty by giving beatings and even blood was oozing out of their feet and there were injury marks. In view of these facts, the revisional Court while following the decision of the Supreme Court in State of U.P. v. Mustakeem and others, vide order dated February 22, 2002 passed in Crl. Appeal Nos. 283-287 of 2002 arising out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 2790, 2793, 2795, 2797, 2800/1999, has ordered for handing over of custody of the bulls with the Gopal Gaushala. In my opinion, the order of custody of the bulls with the Gopal Gaushala is in the interest of the animals where they are being fed properly and given proper treatment. In case the bulls are released on supardari to the petitioners, the possibility of their slaughtering cannot be ruled out. In this petition, no material has been placed by the petitioners that they were carrying 30 bulls to Uttar Pradesh for agriculture purposes. Therefore, in my opinion, till the pendency of the case, the bulls have been rightly given in custody to Gopal Gaushala. I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Dismissed. Petition dismissed.