SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
Salauddin Khan, S/o Jiyauddin Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashwini Bhushan, learned counsel for the State.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 21.02.2022 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Giridih in Cr. Rev. No.164/2019 arising out of Dhanwar P.S. Case No.368/2018 corresponding to G.R. No.2168/2018 whereby the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Giridih has been pleased to dismiss the criminal revision filed by the petitioner and the order dated 21.09.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih has been affirmed.
3. The story of the prosecution is that an information provided by the SDPO, Bagodar that he he intercepted 8 containers near Gandhi Chowk, Dhanwar loaded with bovine animals to the tune of 267, from the spot 8 persons were arrested disclosed their name and also disclosed the name of other accused persons who were involved in the transportation of bovine animals for the purpose of slaughter. It was further alleged that the animals were cruelly stacked in the overcrowded containers and as a result at the time of search and seizure 1 cow and 6 oxen were found to be dead. Thus on such allegation Dha
State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Uday Singh with analogous cases
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 12(3) of the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughtering Act, 2005, regarding the forfeiture of a vehicle to ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a finding of contravention before forfeiture of a vehicle under the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughtering Act, 20....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a finding of contravention before forfeiture of a vehicle under the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughtering Act, 20....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the forfeiture of vehicles under the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughtering Act, 2005 can only occur after a trial concludes and ....
The Act does not provide for confiscation of the vehicle, and forfeiture can only occur after a trial concludes with a conviction. The commercial nature of the vehicle and relevant legal provisions a....
Release of Vehicle - Beef slaughter - Transportation of Cattle or Beef - Whenever a vehicle is found to have been used in transportation of Cattle or Beef contravening any provision of this Act Vehic....
The court's decision was based on the lack of initiation of confiscation proceedings for the seized vehicle under the Rajasthan Bovine Act, 1955, and the potential damage from continued detention.
Prompt action under Section 451 of Cr.P.C. is necessary to avoid keeping seized property at police stations for a long time, and seized vehicles should be released when ownership is not disputed.
The rightful owner of seized property should be allowed to enjoy the property, and the power under Section 451 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be exercised judiciously and promptly.
The impracticality of keeping a seized vehicle idle and the right of the registered owner to release the vehicle on sapurdari were the central legal principles established in the judgment.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.