The U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act does not provide an appeal mechanism for confiscation orders, directing that recourse must be sought through the Divisional Commissioner per the notification of 15.10.2024.

JUDGMENT :

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

1. Sri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ravindra Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present Application U/S 528 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as "B.N.S.S.") has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 10.10.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Chandauli, in Criminal Revision No. 134 of 2025 (Manju Devi vs. State of U.P.), as well as the order dated 19.10.2024, passed by District Magistrate, Chandauli, in Case No. 393 of 2024 (Computerized Case No. D202414180000393), under Section 5(A) of U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, arising out of Case Crime No. 34 of 2024, under Section 3/5A/5B/8 of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, P.S. Sakaldiha, District Chandauli.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on the basis of an information, Vehicle Tata Magic bearing Registration No. U.P. 67 BT 0122 of the applicant, was seized by the police personnel on 07.03.2024 and they found that it was carrying certain bovines. It is also suspected that the said vehicle was used in the illegal transportation of bovines. Thereafter an F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 34 of 2024, under Sections 3/5A/8/5B of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1955) and Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1960"), was registered at P.S. Sakaldiha, District Chandauli, on 07.03.2024. The applicant was owner of the aforesaid vehicle. Thereafter an application was moved by the Investigating Officer on 09.03.2024 before the Superintendent of Police, District Chandauli, who put his report on 30.03.2024 with a prayer to confiscate the aforesaid vehicle. The proceedings under Section 5-A(7) under the Act, 1955, was initiated by the District Magistrate, Chandauli. The notice was also issued to the applicant who did not appear before the District Magistrate, Chandauli, and no objection was filed by her, therefore, the opportunity of hearing of the applicant was closed and the District Magistrate, Chandauli, proceeded ex-parte and confiscated the aforesaid Tata Magic Vehicle No. UP 67 BT 0122.

4. Being aggrieved with the order dated 19.10.2024 passed by the District Magistrate, Chandauli, the applicant filed a Criminal Revision No. 134 of 2025 before the learned Sessions Judge, Chandauli, which was also dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chandauli, vide order dated 10.10.2025 for the reason that criminal revision was not maintainable, hence the present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been moved by the applicant with a prayer to set-aside the aforesaid orders dated 19.10.2024 and 10.10.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant had purchased the aforesaid vehicle for delivery of vegetables in the market and driver as well as the cleaner of the said vehicle were not authorized to transport bovines. The applicant has nothing to do with the alleged offence. The applicant had no knowledge in respect of alleged commission of offence. The police has illegally made the applicant one of the accused in the F.I.R. and no one has claimed ownership of the vehicle and the applicant only is the registered owner of the vehicle and the said confiscated vehicle be released in her favour.

6. Learned A.G.A. has submitted that present Application U/S 528 B.N.S.S. is not maintainable. The applicant wrongly and illegally challenged the order of District Magistrate, Chandauli, before lear