Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SANGEETA CHANDRA, NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, JJ.
Bhupendra Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 5498 of 2023
Decided on : 18-07-2023
U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act - Section-3/5-A/8 - Animal Cruelty Act - Section 11 - Constitution of India - Article 226 - Quashing of the F.I.R - Offence of cow slaughter - Grant of interim relief - Held, impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence by petitioner, no interference is called for by Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of Constitution of India for quashing of F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief - Writ petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents.
2. This petition has been filed with the following main prayer:-
"[i] issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned First Information Report lodged by the opposite party no.4 on 03-05-2023 vide First Information Report no.0198 of 2023, Under Section-3/5-A/8 of Uttar Pradesh Preventio of Cow Slaughter Act and Section 11 of Animal Cruelty Act at Police Station-Kadipur, District-Sultanpur, as contained in Annexure 1 to this petition."
3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been named by one of the accused as owner of the vehicle in which cattle were being carried. He has no concern with the alleged offence of cow slaughter.
4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and submitted that cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner in the impugned FIR, therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. The arguments made by learned counsel for the petitioner can be considered at the stage of Trial by the Trial Court.
6. After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned F.I.R., we are of the opinion that the impugned F.I.R. discloses cognizable offence by the petitioner, hence, no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner and accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed.
SupremeToday
The court, without adjudicating the merits, may grant interim protection against arrest when the accused expresses a willingness to surrender before the appropriate trial court, thereby balancing inv....
The court's decision was based on the application of principles governing the quashing of FIRs, emphasizing that the power to quash should be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that no permit is required for transportation of cows and its progeny within the State of U.P. under Section 5-A of the U.P. Prevention of Cow S....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the order for confiscation of the vehicle under the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 was revisable under Section 397 of the Code of ....
No permit is required to transport cow and its progeny within the state of Uttar Pradesh.
A petitioner has the right to withdraw a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR, allowing for the pursuit of other legal remedies.
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
