[2026:RJ-JD:10834]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Appeal (Sb) No. 2271/2023 Ashiq S/o Ismail Titrodiya, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Bamaniya Dera Yashoverdhan Nagar Ps Dist. Mandsaur M.p.

----Appellant Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. S.S. Shaktawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Judgment

REPORTABLE DATE OF CONCLUSION OF ARGUMENTS 19/02/2026 DATE ON WHICH ORDER IS RESERVED 19/02/2026 FULL ORDER OR OPERATIVE PART Full Order DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 06/03/2026 BY THE COURT:-

1. The instant Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 22.08.2023 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in Sessions Case No.19/2016 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as under:-

Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 10.04.2014, at around 6:15 a.m., Bichhiwara Police Station received a tip regarding the transportation of bovine animals in Truck No.RJ-09- GA-1764, allegedly destined for slaughter in Gujarat via Ratanpur. Acting on this information, police personnel, along with two independent witnesses, Lalshanker and Dinesh, set up a nakabandi on the road towards NH-8.

2.1. At approximately 7:45 a.m., the truck, driven at high speed, attempted to evade the checkpoint. Police pursued and stopped it near Ansol. The driver, Akbar, and cleaner, Ashiq, were apprehended after trying to flee. Akbar, however, has subsequently absconded. Upon inspection, 58 animals were recovered, including 30 calves and 24 buffaloes, with one buffalo and two calves found dead. The accused failed to produce any valid permit for transporting the animals.

2.2. On the basis of the above, FIR No. 119/2014 was registered under Sections 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animals Act, 1995. After investigation, the accused were charged, and during trial, the prosecution examined 17 witnesses and tendered 33 documents, while the defense produced none, asserting false implication. The trial court, vide its judgment dated 22.08.2023, acquitted the accused under Sections 3/8 and 5/8, but convicted them under Sections 6/8 and 9 of the Act. Hence the instant criminal appeal.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment as well as minutely gone through material available on record.

4. Upon meticulous perusal of the case record, it becomes manifest that the authorities intercepted a vehicle in the course of their investigation. At the time of interception, the Truck was allegedly being driven by Akbar, with Ashiq occupying the cleaner’s seat. The present appellant, however, was merely found seated within the vehicle. Critically, there exists no evidence attributing to him any overt act, incriminating conduct, or discernible role in the alleged offence. The record is devoid of any material that might establish whether he was merely travelling as a passenger, actively assisting in the transportation, or even cognizant of the purported illegality of the activity. Likewise, there is no evidence to demonstrate any nexus between the appellant and the driver, owner, or cleaner, nor any proprietary, possessory, or managerial connection with the vehicle in question.

4.1. It follows, therefore, that the entire edifice of the prosecution against the appellant rests solely upon his physical presence within the vehicle a circumstance which, in criminal jurisprudence, is inherently equivocal and, without corroboration, patently insufficient to sustain a conviction. The law requires cogent and reliable evidence establishing conscious knowledge and active participation to impute criminal liability.

4.2. The conviction against the appellant is purportedly predicated upon Section 3 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animals [Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export] Act, 1995, whic