SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Gau) 802

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.
Md. Johur Uddin, S/o. Late Mujibur Rahman – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam, To Be Rep. By The PP, Assam And Anr. – Respondents
Crl. Pet. No.509 of 2024
Decided On : 22-05-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Alhajj I. Uddin.
For the Respondents: Mr. K.K. Parashar, Addl. PP, Assam.

IMPORTANT POINT
The applicability of provisions of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 in granting custody of a seized vehicle under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is determined based on the stage of investigation and the specific circumstances of the case.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code - Custody of Seized Vehicle - Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 - Section 428 IPC, Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021, Section 11(1) (a) (d) (e) (h) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 - Section 451, Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 to challenge an order granting custody of a seized vehicle with a condition to furnish a bank guarantee equivalent to the market value of the vehicle, in connection with a case involving the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the insistence of a bank guarantee as prescribed under the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021 was not applicable as the investigation was already concluded at the time of filing the application for custody of the seized vehicle.

Issues: The issues involved the applicability of the provisions of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 in granting custody of a seized vehicle under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021 did not apply as the investigation was concluded at the time of filing the application for custody of the seized vehicle, and therefore, the insistence of a bank guarantee was not sustainable under law.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition by setting aside the order and directed that the custody of the seized vehicle be granted to the registered owner/petitioner with specific terms and conditions.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. A.I. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 assailing an order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hamren, West Karbi Anglong in Petition No. 37/2024 in connection with PRC No. 35/2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 29/2024 arising out of Hamren Police Station Case No. 03/2024 registered under Sections 428 IPC read with Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act 2021 also read with Section 11(1) (a) (d) (e) (h) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate while allowing petition No. 37/2024 filed under Section 451 of the Code by the petitioner praying for custody of his Bolero Pick UP vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-31-C-0882 imposed a condition to furnish bank guarantee equivalent to the market value of the vehicle.

3. This Court under its Judgment and Order (CAV) dated 22.05.2024 passed in Crl.Rev.P./143/2024, laid down the following propositions of law:-

    I. Sub Section 14 of Section 7 of the Act, 2021, Sub Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021 and Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is enacted to facilitate investigation and to give the police officers the power to gather evidence to support the allegations made, which includes search, seizure and detain etc.

II. The release of seized material as envisaged under sub Section 5 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021 and envisaged under Section 102 of Cr.P.C., are relatable only to the stage of seizure under Sub Section 3 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021 and under Chapter VII of the Cr.P.C., respectively. And, therefore, such prescription cannot be made relatable to a provision of disposal of property during enquiry and trial.

III. The Act, 2021 is silent as regards disposal of property during enquiry and trial and that being the position and in absence any specific prescription in the Act, 2021, the provision of Chapter XXXIV of the Code, 1973 shall be applicable so far the same relates to disposal of property, seized under the provision of Section 11 of the Act, 2021. Therefore, when application under Section 451 or Section 457 of Cr.P.C. is made, the principles laid down in Sunderbhai Ambala Desai –Vs-State of Gujrat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283 shall be made applicable.

IV. The prescription made under sub section 5 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021 is relatable only to a situation/stage when the authorised officer(s) exercises its power under sub sections 3 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021 or under sub section 14 of Section 7 of the Act, 221 and reports the same to the Judicial Magistrate First Class in terms of sub section 4 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021.

V. A revision either under Section 401, 397 or 482 of Cr.PC. shall not be maintainable against an order passed in exercise of power under sub section 5 of Section 11 of the Act, 2021 and appropriate remedy shall be an appeal under Section 12 of the Act, 2021.

VI. No appeal shall be maintainable under section 12 of the Act, 2021 when a determination is made in an application filed under Section 451 or Section 457 of the Cr.P.C. as the case may be.

4. Now, coming to the case in hand, it is seen that 10 numbers of bullocks were seized from a vehicle bearing registration No. AS-31-C-6887 which is a Bolero Pick-up van. 10 numbers of bullocks were seized from a vehicle bearing registration No. AS-02-DC-1999, 9 numbers of bullocks were found in a vehicle bearing registration No. AS-02-DC-4262, 8 numbers bullocks were found in a vehicle bearing registration No. AS-02-DC-4043 and 10 numbers of bullocks were found in a vehicle bearing registration No. AS-31-C-6887.

5. The present petition relates to the vehicle bearing registration No. AS-31-C-0882 from which 10 numbers of bullocks were recovered.

6. As recorded hereinabo

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top