SCR.A/88320/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 883 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Sd/- ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? 1 to 5 NO ========================================================= RAGHUBHAI MANABHAI PARMAR - Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR ASHOK K PADIA for Applicant(s) : 1, MR IM PANDYA ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Date : 20/10/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 05.03.2008 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Ahmedabad City, in Criminal Revision Application No.70 of 2008, the petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer that 20 calves seized pursuant to the FIR registered as C.R.II- SCR.A/88320/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT 3005 of 2008 on 10.01.2008 and kept at panjarapole, Odhav as muddamal may be returned to the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner was that cruelty to animals was committed and the calves were being transported for the purpose of slaughter. 2. It was submitted by learned counsel Mr.Padia that the petitioner was owner in possession of the calves and the offences were as yet not proved. He submitted that the petitioner was prepared to abide by such conditions as may be imposed by the Court. It was submitted by learned A.P.P. Mr.I.M.Pandya that, if, in view of recent decision of the Apex Court, this Court was inclined to accept the prayer of the petitioner, the livestock may be ordered to be delivered to the petitioner on stricter conditions as imposed by this Court in its order dated 25.08.2006 in Special Criminal Application No.1063 of 2006. 3. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the livestock is ordered to be delivered to the petitioner on production of a copy of this order, on the following terms and conditions: (i) The petitioner shall take proper care of the livestock which are given to the petitioner by way of interim custody. (ii) The petitioner shall have the livestock checked at the interval of every two month and obtain certificate in writing from the qualified Veterinary Officer of the area. (iii) The Veterinary Officer of the area concerned is hereby directed to inspect the livestock at the request of the petitioner once in every two month SCR.A/88320/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT beginning from November, 2008 and issue certificate about the condition of the livestock. (iv) In case, in the intervening period, if any of the livestock dies, then, its body shall not be removed without calling the Veterinary Officer of the area, who shall certify the cause of death. (v) The livestock shall be given to the petitioner only for interim custody during the pendency of the trial, and the petitioner shall produce the livestock before the trial Court as and when required, and he shall file an undertaking to that effect within 15 days from the date of this order. (vi) The petitioner shall also indicate in the undertaking that he will keep the livestock in good condition. (vii) The petitioner shall furnish bond in the sum of Rs.25,000=00 (Rs. Twenty five thousand only) before the trial Court for keeping safe custody of the livestock. The petitioner is directed that this condition shall also be incorporated in the undertaking. 4. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. Direct service. Sd/- ( D.H.Waghela, J.) (KMG Thilake)