Jharkhand High Court
Md Tauhid Ali vs The State Of Jharkhand on 3 November, 2017
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 2777 of 2017
----
Md. Tauhid Ali, S/o Md. Nezam Ali, Resident of 35/A, Watghung Street,
P.O. and P.S. Kidderpore, Kolkatta, West Bengal..Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand. ....Opposite Party
----
Coram: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
----------
For the Petitioner : Mr. A. Allam, Sr. Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
-----
02/3.11.2017Heard the parties.
In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 28.8.2017, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, in Criminal Revision No. 82 of 2017, whereby and whereunder order dated 7.7.2017, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Hazaribagh in connection with Chouparan P.S. Case No. 58 of 2017 rejecting prayer for release of the vehicle has been affirmed.
It appears that Chouparan P.S. Case No. 58 of 2017 was instituted on the allegation of violation of Jharkhand Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter) Act, 2005. A truck bearing registration no. WB 19F 2792 was apprehended, in which 24 cows were found, out of which, one was detected to be dead. The petitioner claiming himself to be the owner of the vehicle in question filed an application for release of the same before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Hazaribagh, which was however, rejected on 7.7.2017. Against the said order, the petitioner had preferred a revision application being Cr. Revision No. 82 of 2017, which was also dismissed on 28.8.2017.
It further appears from perusal of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate as well as revisional order that primary consideration has been made with respect to the provisions of Jharkhand Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter) Act, 2005. It also appears that the investigation has not been concluded till date. The complicity or otherwise for contravening the provisions of Jharkhand Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter) Act, 2005 can only be ascertained after conclusion of the trial. In such circumstances, therefore, the revisional order dated 28.8.2017 as well as the order dated 7.7.2017, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Hazaribagh in connection with Chouparan P.S. Case No. 58 of 2017 are hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back -2- to the learned Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
It is made clear that while considering the release application of the petitioner, learned court below shall get it ascertained as to whether the petitioner is the actual owner of the vehicle in question or not. It is further made clear that provisions of Jharkhand Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter) Act, 2005 shall not come in the way of the learned Magistrate if it is ultimately found that the petitioner is the actual owner of the vehicle in question.
This application stands disposed of.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) Rakesh/-