Point of Law: Seizer of cattle - Cattles were transported in the vehicle by allotting the provision of the act and the rules and the petitioner is silent as regards with the compliance of the rules i.e. Section 11 of the Act and the proviso to Section 11(d).

JUDGMENT :

Heard Ms. A Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. K K Parashar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondents.

2. This revision petition under Section 397/401 r/w Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the Order dated 25.05.2022 passed by the learned FTC No. 3, Kamrup (Metro) in Misc. Case No. 62/2022 u/s 120(B)/379 IPC r/w Section 11(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021.

3. It is to be noted herein that vide impugned Order, Court below has dismissed the zimmapetition filed by the petitioner in Misc. Case No. 62/2022 seeking custody of 25 numbers of cattle which were seized in the aforementioned case. The factual background leading to filing of the present petition is briefly stated as under:-

“On 28.04.2022, S.I Bormon of Police Station, acting on a tip off apprehended one twelve wheeler TATA Truck bearing Registration no. NL-01- AA-3451, loaded with 25 numbers of cattle at Borkhat Baruwari village, at NH37, and on being asked, the driver of the vehicle failed to produce any document of the cattles. Thereafter, S.I Bupendra Rawat has seized the same preparing seizure list and during, preliminary investigation it has been found that one accused Babul Das, Tunmun Das and Md. Sohibur Rahman are involved in illegal trade of cattle smuggling into Bangladesh through Meghalaya. Upon the said FIR, the Officer-in-charge, Sonapur P.S has registered Sonapur P.S Case No. 102/2022 u/s 120B/379 IPC r/w Section 11(a)(b)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 13(1) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021 and endorse S.I Bupendra Rawat to investigate the same. Thereafter, the petitioner Md. Ariful Islam had preferred a petition seeking custody of the seized cattle before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC No. 3, Kamrup at Guwahati. Then, the learned Court below has called for one report from the I.O concerned as to (i) who are the owner of the cattles. (ii) whether the cattles were subject to cruelty, (iii) who were the registered owner of the seized vehicle, (iv) whether the seized cattle and vehicles were required for the purpose of investigation. Thereafter the I.O. had submitted one report to the effect that the petitioner had purchased the cattle

4. Being highly aggrieved the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present petition on the ground that the I.O in his report has clearly stated that the seized vehicle and the seized cattle are not required for the purpose of investigation but the learned Court below has failed to appreciate the said fact, and that the learned Court below also failed to consider the fact that the petitioner has purchased the cattle for agricultural purpose, and that the Police has seized the cattle on the ground of suspicion only and such suspicion is unfounded in view of the petitioner before the learned Court below but the learned Court below has failed to consider the same and that the learned Court below also failed to consider that the seized cattles are not stolen cattle which were purchased legally and that the animals were not subjected to any kind of cruelty as they were provided with food and water and proper care was taken and that the petitioner is a farmer and he purchased the cattle for agricultural purpose and that the health condition of the cattles are being deteriorating day by day and in the event of not releasing them in the custody of the petitioner, he will suffer hardship and irreparable loss and therefore it is contended to allow the petition.

5. Ms. A Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the I.O has illegally seized the cattle in spite of the documents shown for purchasing of the cattle and that the learned Court below without applying its mind has dismissed the petition in spite of the fact that the I.O. has submitted a written report to the effect that the cattle and the vehi