MOHD. GUDDU KHAN, S/O ABDUL SATTAR R/O MEHDI BEGAM, P.O & P.S. BURDWAN DISTT. BURDWAN, WEST BENGAL Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Application has been preferred against the order dated 18.2.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad, in P.C.A No.567/2014, whereby the prayer for release of the truck bearing registration no. WB-41-D-2866 was rejected, which was affirmed by the Sessions Judge, Dhanbad vide order dated 19.3.2015 in Cr.Rev. No.61/2015.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the registered owner of the seized truck bearing registration no. WB-41-D-2866 and the said truck had been purchased after taking loan and the instalment is being paid on monthly basis. That the said truck is a commercial vehicle and is the only means of livelihood of the petitioner and his family. It is submitted that the learned court below has rejected the prayer for release of the said truck in terms of Sec. 12(3) of the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005(herein after referred as 'Act') and held that the vehicle is liable to be forfeited by the State of Jharkhand under the provisions of the Act. It is submitted that the trial court has failed to appreciate the provisions of the Act which contemplates that vehicle shall be liable to be forfeited/confiscated by the State Government after the order of conviction is recorded. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that under similar circumstances, a Bench of this Court, in Cr.M.P.No. 3018 of 2013, had ordered for release the vehicle and held that "it would not be proper and appropriate to allow the vehicles to be kept in the custody of the police, as admittedly the petitioner are still to be put on trial". Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a decision in the case of Sunderbhai Ambala Desai Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2002)10 SCC 283 wherein it had been categorically stated that a commercial vehicle should not be kept in the police custody for a very long period.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State has opposed and submitted that the said truck was carrying Bovine animals which were in loaded in a pathetic and cruel condition and the driver of the said truck did not produce any certificate under Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, which is mandatory for carriage of Bovine animals from one State to the other via Jharkhand.