Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Yamin Quraishi @ Pappan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 November, 2014
Bench: Sudhir Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 34
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45833 of 2014
Applicant :- Mohd. Yamin Quraishi @ Pappan
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings in Crl. Case No. 507 of 2012 (State Vs. Charan Singh and others) under section 3/8 Cow Slaughter Act in Case Crime No. 87 of 2012, Police Station Mantola Qasba, district Agra pending in the court of Special Chief Judicial Judicial Magistrate, Agra.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that in the FIR it is not stated that the applicant has been arrested or alleged cow was recovered from his possession. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case on behest of other two persons Charan Singh and Munesh who were carrying cow. The applicant has no concerned with slaughtering of the cow. He runs a dairy. Hence the entire prosecution against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. The Investigation Officer has submitted charge sheet in a pedantic manner and court below has summon them for face the trial in the charged offences in a routine manner.
4. It is evident that two persons were caught by police under section 3/5 Ka/9 of UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, who were carrying cows and told their names are Charan Singh and Munesh. They said that one Pappan alias Pappu (the applicant), who slaughtered cows, has allured them for money for bringing cows.
5. I have gone through provisions of Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955, which is reproduced herein below:
3. Prohibition of Cow Slaughter:(1). Except as hereinafter provided, no person shall slaughter or cause to be slaughtered, or offer or cause to be offered for slaughter:-
(a) a cow, or
(b) a bull or bullock, unless he has obtained in respect thereof a certificate in writing, from the competent authority of the area in which the bull or bullock is to be slaughtered, certifying that it is fit for slaughter, in any place in Uttar Pradesh, anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or an usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.
(2) Non bull or bullock, in respect of which a certificate has been issued under sub-section (1)(b) shall be slaughtered at any place other than the place indicated in the certificate.
(3) A certificate under sub-section (1) (b) shall be issued by the competent authority, only after it ha, for reasons to be recorded in writing; certified that -
(a) the bull or bullock is over the age of (fifteen years), or
(b) in the case of a bull, it has become permanently unfit and unserviceable for the purpose of breeding and, in the case of bullock, it has become permanently unfit and unserviceable for the purpose of daughter and any kind of agricultural operation provided that the permanent unfitness or unserviceable has not been caused deliberately.
6. Having considered the submission made by the learned counsel at the bar and after going to the statement of abovenamed two persons who were caught by the police and who stated that the cows in question were sought to slaughtered by the applicant, it what is said in the FIR is treated to be corrected, it cannot be said that the applicant has not committed any cognizable offence under section aforesaid. The Court below, therefore, has rightly taken cognizance against the applicants. There is no illegality or perversity in the order of the Court below.
7. The application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.11.2014
SKS
