KALIM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been filed by petitioner Kalim, against the order dated Nevember 3, 2008 of Addl. Sessions Bandikui (Distt. Dausa) in Criminal Appeal No. 36 of 2008 whereby the appeal of the accused appellant against the judgment of Judicial Magistrate dated October 3, 2008 whereby he convicted the accused -appellant of the offence under Section 5/8 read with Section 6 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995 and sentenced him for eight months RI with fine of Rs. 2,000/ -. In default of fine to undergo one month simple imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the accused was caught raid handed carrying 15 -20 cow -calf's for slaughtering in the Canter vehicle on Bypass Dausa National Highway No. 11. The accused was driver of the said Canter and the other accused who were 4 -5 in number ran away when the raiding party of police personnel caught the Canter vehicle. The Police Station Sikandara filed FIR and investigation commenced. After investigation the police filed challan against the accused petitioner and other persons on October 3, 2008. The accused -petitioner voluntarily confessed the guilt on the date when the challan was filed and submitted a separate application accepting the guilt. The Judicial Magistrate vide judgment dated October 3, 2008 convicted the accused appellant of the offence under Section 5/8 read with Section 6 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995 and sentenced him for eight months Rl with fine of Rs. 2000/ -. In default of fine to undergo one month simple imprisonment. The accused petitioner filed appeal against the said order and vide order dated November 3, 2008 the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bandikui rejected the appeal and upheld the judgment of conviction and sentence on account of confession of guilt by the accused petitioner. Hence, this revision petition.

(3.) MR . S.N. Kumawat, Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State of Rajasthan opposed the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and contended that in such a heinous offence, the petitioner should not be given any remission and the jail authorities be directed not give any remission to the accused petitioner and he be remained in jail for full period of sentence awarded to him. The orders of the Courts below are perfectly legal and no interference in the revisional jurisdiction is called for and the revision petition be rejected.