THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI CRIMINAL PETITION No.7251 of 2022

O R D E R :

Challenging the release order, dated 06.08.2022 pursuant to the order, dated 05.08.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1856 of 2022 in Crime No.206 of 2022 by the learned Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bhongir, the petitioner-Gaushala-third party has filed this Criminal Petition. By the impugned order, the case property i.e., six bullocks were ordered to be released in favour of respondent No.2-accused on certain conditions.

2. Heard Mr. G.L.Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State. Inspite of service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2, despite the matter pertaining to the year 2022. Perused the record.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 08.07.2022, on receiving credible information, the de facto complainant proceeded to the Guduru Toll Plaza, Bibinagar Mandal, intercepted a DCM bearing No.TS- 12-UD-0667 and found respondent No.2-accused transporting the cattle for slaughtering by tying them with ropes and without providing them proper fodder and water. Basing on the same, a case in Crime No.206 of

2022 was registered against respondent No.2-accused for the offences punishable under Section 11 read with Section 38 of Prevention of Cruelty of Animal Act, 1960 and Rules 47 to 56 of Transport of Animal Rules, 1988.

4. After seizure, the cattle were given to the safe custody of the petitioner-Gaushala. While so, respondent No.2-accused claiming to be the owner has filed an application in Crl.M.P.No.1856 of 2022 seeking interim custody of the seized cattle and the learned Magistrate has ordered the Station House Officer of Bibinagar Police Station to release the same in favour of respondent No.2-accused by the impugned order. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner-Gaushala approached this Court by filing this criminal petition.

5. Submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner:

5.1. The learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order in complete disregard of Rule 56(c) of the Transport of Animals Rules, 1978, Rule 125-E of the Central Motor Vehicle (11^th Amendment) Rules, 2007 and Section 17 of the Telangana Prohibition of Cow Slaughter and Animal Preservation Act, 1977. The learned Magistrate has erred in granting interim custody of the seized cattle to respondent No.2-accused pending trial, when charges of cruelty and slaughtering are levelled against him, by wrongly relying on the ownership documents of cattle.

The 2^nd respondent-accused is none other than an agent or the owner engaged in the business of cow slaughtering and he has violated several provisions of the Transport of Animals Rules, 1978, including failure to produce veterinary fitness certificates (Form-H), absence of first aid kits in vehicles, no proper labelling on trucks, lack of sufficient space for each animal, inadequate food and water during transport, absence of anti-

slipping material and transporting more than six animals per vehicle.

5.2. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Animal Welfare Board of India v. A.Nagaraja and others, (2014) 7 SCC 547, wherein, it is held that the animals have the right to live with dignity under Article 21 read with Article 51-A (g) of the Constitution of India, and hence, prayed to set aside and quash the impugned order.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that after completion of investigation, the Police filed charge sheet, the same was taken cognizance, numbered as C.C.No.612 of 2022 and the same is pending.

7. When the present matter came up for admission on 16.08.2022, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court granted interim stay of operation of the impugned order, dated 06.08.2022.

8. It is apposite to refer to Rule 3 of the Prevention