Gujarat High Court
Royal vs State on 1 February, 2012
Author: S. Dave
Bench: Anant S. Dave, S. Dave
SCR.A/353/2012 6/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 345 of 2012 With SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 353 of 2012 & SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.403 OF 2012 AL QURESH EXPORT & DELHI BARODA ROAD CARRIERS PVT LTD & ROYAL EXPORTS Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANOTHER ====================================== Appearance : MR. S.V. RAJU, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR ABHISHEK M MEHTA for Applicant Mr. J.K. Shah, APP, for respondent Mr. V.G. Popat for the informant. ====================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE Date : 16/02/2012 COMMON ORAL ORDER
1 In Special Criminal Application Nos. 345 and 353 of 2012 filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have challenged legality, validity and maintainability of the FIR being I CR No.19/2012 registered at Navsari Rural Police Station, Navsari, on 27.1.2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 6(b)(2)(3), 8(2)(4), 9, 10, 11(2) of the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act, 1954 {for short, 'the Act}, and Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas in Special Criminal Application No.403 of 2012, the impugned FIR is I CR No.32 of 2012 registered at Vapi Town Police Station, Vapi, dated 1.2.2012 for the same offences.
2. Since the issue in all the three petitions is common, they are taken up for hearing together.
3 The case of the petitioners is that they are recognized exporters and transporters engaged in the business of export/transport of consignments of buffalo meat through refrigerated trucks from the State of Uttar Pradesh to other States including Jawaharlal Nehru Port at Mumbai, Maharashtra. That, the said consignments, namely, refrigerated trucks, while passing through the State of Gujarat and en-route to Mumbai, have been seized by initiating the proceedings as stated hereinabove.
4 Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, would contend that the petitioners are export oriented units engaged in the business of processing and packing buffalo meat in the State of Utter Pradesh. That they are regularly transporting their consignments to Jawaharlal Nehru Port, Mumbai, Maharashtra enroute Gujarat. Certificate of condition of meat before export is granted by the Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of Uttar Pradesh and, accordingly, the meat is loaded in the refrigerated truck, sealed by the Officer of the Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of Uttar Pradesh and relevant medical and other hygienic checks are carried out so as to ensure that the consignments meant for export are safely transported and reach their destination. That, after the consignments are off-loaded at the port premises, in a given case, the Customs Authority under its supervision, may draw sample before the actual export takes place. In the above circumstances, when the said consignments/trucks were passing through the State of Gujarat, upon an information, etc. they came to be seized and the FIRs were registered. That, the meat in question is a perishable item and, if it is not released, it would cause immense monetary loss to the petitioners and they would loose the business in future. That, such an arbitrary action on the part of the informant and the State Authorities in invoking the provisions of the Act and even registering offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is nothing but an act of intimidation and amounts to disrupting the business of the petitioners, including loss to the foreign exchange. That, the material is worth Rs.3.6 crores. That, the Directorate of Forensic Science Laboratories, State of Maharashtra, at Mumbai, carried out the test and the result of analysis indicates that muddamal is buffalo meat and the immunological test gave strong indication of Buffalo anti sera. Therefore, according to the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, the muddamal may be ordered to be released forthwith.
5 Learned APP appearing for the State would submit that the analysis carried out at the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Surat, State of Gujarat, would reveal that certain samples contained meat of cow species and, as per the amendment carried out in the Act, the State Authority is empowered to intercept the truck/container carrying such prohibited item under the Act and, therefore, the prayer of the petitioners for releasing the goods may be rejected.
6 Mr. V.G. Popat, learned counsel appearing for the informant, has also opposed to grant of relief to the petitioners on the ground that the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Surat, State of Gujarat, on analyzing a few samples, found meat of cow species.
7 Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the record, at this stage, prima-facie, the following facts would emerge:
[a] The petitioners are authorized by the competent Authority of the Department of Animal Husbandry, Government of Uttar Pradesh, to transport and export buffalo meat by issuing certificate as required;
[b] The said buffalo meat is again tested by the Department of Customs by drawing sample randomly before the actual export takes place;
[c] The report issued by the Directorate of Forensic Science Laboratories, State of Maharashtra, at Mumbai, indicates that the muddamal contains buffalo meat with strong indication of Buffalo anti sera, not necessarily the meat of cow or cow species.
[d] However, the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Surat, State of Gujarat, on analyzing a few samples, found meat of cow species.
[e] The said buffalo meat is meant for export; it is perishable and, if it is not released, a huge monetary loss would cause to the petitioners.
8. Considering the above, and keeping in mind the judgment and order dated 12.2.2009 passed by the Apex Court in the case of identical nature viz.
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.22665/2008 [Refrigerated Truck Owners Welfare Association & Another vs. Union of India and others, wherein it is observed that:
"As was pointed out by Mr. Patwalia, appearing for the petitioners, a consignment of this nature is required to be carried under controlled temperatures and if the same is disturbed, it can lead to quick deterioration. The truck carrying such a consignment and opening of the refrigerated chamber could have an adverse effect on the consignment. Even expecting the FSL report to reach the concerned authorities within 48 hours, appears to be unrealistic and there could be much more delay than has been contemplated. This will also be evident from the chart submitted by Ms. Wahi regarding the types of cases registered in relation to offence by transporters while carrying consignments of buffalo meat through the State of Gujarat. In most of the cases the offence occurred some time in the middle of the year 2007 or thereafter and the consignment of meat is said to have been kept in cold storage since then and nothing finally has been decided even though about one and half years have passed since the consignment was intercepted.
Accordingly, in order to arrive at an equitable solution to the problem, we are of the view that certain checks may be put in place on the refrigerated trucks while passing through the State of Gujarat to prevent any tampering with the said consignment once it reaches the State of Gujarat and exists therefrom We, accordingly, grant leave to the authorities of the State of Gujarat, upon receiving a specific complaint that a particular truck was carrying goods other than that certified for, they would be at liberty to seal the consignment on the entry of the concerned truck into the State of Gujarat, which would remain intact till the truck reached its ultimate destination. The authorities of the State of Gujarat would, thereafter, be at liberty to unseal the consignment and take samples therefrom for being sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory after taking necessary steps to reseal the consignment. Such FSL report must reach the authorities concerned within four days from the date of the arriving of the consignment at the port in question and on receipt of such report, the authorities shall either clear the consignment or take further steps as they may consider necessary.
As far as consignment going to the ports at Mumbai are concerned, the authorities of the State of Gujarat will be entitled to forward the complaints received in respect of any particular vehicle to their counter parts in the State of Maharashtra to take the same steps, as indicated hereinabove. In any event, the consignment should not be delayed for more than two weeks, within which period, if the FSL report is not received, the authorities of the State of Gujarat or Maharashtra will unseal the consignment and after completion of necessary formalities, allow the same to be exported.
I.A. 2 is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
We make it clear that any observations made in this order is for the purpose of the disposal of the interlocutory application and will have no direct bearing at the time of the hearing of the special leave petition.
The respondents will be entitled to file their counter affidavits to the special leave petition within four weeks; rejoinder, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List the matter after six weeks."
in the facts of the present case also, I am of the view that overall facts and circumstances persuade this Court to order release of all vehicles/trucks seized pursuant to the FIRs being I CR No.19/2012 registered at Navsari Rural Police Station, Navsari, on 27.1.2012, and CR No.32 of 2012 registered at Vapi Town Police Station, Vapi, on 1.2.2012, forthwith, upon the petitioners filing a proper undertaking to the effect that, if they fail in the cases instituted before the competent court of law against them, for all purposes, they will recoup the loss and abide by the final verdict of the Court. Order accordingly.
Applicability of the amended Act will be considered at the final hearing of the matters.
S.O. To 12.3.2012.
Direct service is permitted.
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) (swamy) ALIGN=JUSTIFY STYLE="margin-bottom: 0in; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%"> (swamy)