Back
S. RACHAIAH
K. C. Siju – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. These two Criminal Revision Petitions have been filed by the petitioners, being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 17/8/2007 in C.C.No.1765/2005 on the file of the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Madikeri and its confirmation judgment and order dtd. 12/2/2014 in Crl.A.No.71/2007 on the file of the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu at Madikeri, wherein the petitioners have been convicted for the offences under Ss. 4, 5, 8, 9, 11 of the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation Act, 1964 (for short "Act") and Sec. 379 read with Sec. 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').
2. The petitioners are the accused before the Trial Court and the appellants before the Appellate Court. Brief facts of the case are as under:
3. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 9/6/2005 in the early morning at about 2.30 a.m., when the petitioners were transporting the cattle to Kerala State through the lorry bearing its No.KA.12.A.6336, the lorry was intercepted at Nelli Hudikeri junction by PW.1 and his staff and they seized the vehicle and also took the cattle to the custody and arrested the p
Convictions under the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation Act require clear and cogent evidence, and mere transportation of cattle without documentation does not suffice to ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused, prima facie guilty of causing cruelty to the animals, was not entitled to interim custody of the seized cattle.
Ownership and livelihood are paramount in determining interim custody of seized property under Cr.P.C. provisions.
Ownership of animals does not guarantee custody if the owner fails to comply with legal requirements for their transport and care, as established under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and re....
Section 35 of the Act provides that for proper care and treatment of animals in respect of which offences under this Act have been committed, such animal can be kept in pinjrapole with a direction th....
No permit is required to transport cow and its progeny within the state of Uttar Pradesh.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
