1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. O R D E R Yamin. Versus State of Rajasthan & ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3004/2008 ... Date of Order: August 27, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Mr. S.K. Poonia, for the petitioner. Mr. Shyam Ladrecha, Additional Govt. Counsel, for respondents. BY THE COURT: By the instant writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19-11-2007 (Annx.4) passed by the District Collector, Hanumangarh, as also the order Annx.5 dated 03.4.2008 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Bikaner on an appeal filed by the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Carefully gone through the orders impugned, the record and the reply to the writ petition. 2 It appears that a criminal case, bearing FIR No.525/2007 was registered against the petitioner for the offence under Section 11 (g) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Certain Animals Act, 1960 (for short, “the Act, 1960” hereinafter) as also under Section 5/8 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animals Act, 1995 (for short, “the Act, 1955” hereinafter) and after thorough investigation, the police filed the challan against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences and the trial is pending. The bulls recovered by the police in the aforesaid offences are the subject-matter of the case. It appears that the petitioner was found transporting 25 bulls in a truck bearing No. UP.22-T-0581 in violation of the provisions of the Act, 1960 and the Act, 1995. From the evidence available on record, the cruelty towards the animals is obvious. At the time of checking of the said truck by the police, the petitioner failed to show any permit or receipt or the documents relating the ownership of the said bulls, two of the bulls were found dead. On post-mortem conducted on the dead bulls, it was found that the two bulls died due to asphyxia. There is concurrent finding recorded by the District Collector and the Divisional Commissioner. Therefore, no case for interference in exercise of the powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is made out, keeping in view the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 2003 SC 3 1651. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nohar is directed to expedite the trial of the case and dispose of the case utmost expeditiously. (H.R. PANWAR), J. mcs+