Sarifuddin Ali vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 2946 Gua

                                                                                    Page No. 1/4

GAHC010158172022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
     (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./409/2022

            SARIFUDDIN ALI
            S/O FAKARUDDIN ALI
            R/O VILL- AND P.O. DANDUA
            P.S. AND DIST. MORIGAON,

            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
            REP. BY THE LEARNED PP, ASSAM

            2:JYOTI ENTERPRISE
             BEGANATI NAGAON
             DIST. NAGAON
            ASSAM
            PIN-78200

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R ALI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM


                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                            ORDER

Date : 12-08-2022

Heard Mr. T. Chutia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1, State of Assam.

2. This criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 and Section Page No. 2/4

482, Code of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ['the Code' and/or 'CrPC'] is directed against a judgment and order dated 01.07.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon in Petition no. 1280 preferred by the petitioner in connection with Nagaon Police Station Case no. 716/2022.

3. The First Information Report [FIR] in Nagaon Police Station Case no. 716/2022 was lodged on 15.06.2022 by a Head Constable, attached to Borghat Police Post, Nagaon Sadar Police Station. As per the FIR, the informant was on patrolling duty along with other police personnel during the night hours intervening 14.06.2022 and 15.06.2022 and it was at around 12-00 a.m., the patrolling party saw a vehicle bearing registration no. AS-02/AC-5555 ['the subject-vehicle', for short] coming from Uriagaon side towards Guwahati. The subject- vehicle was stopped and searched and during search, 17 nos. of cattle were found inside the vehicle. The driver and the handyman of the vehicle on being interrogated, stated that the cattle were being transported from Golaghat to Jorabat. The crime case is thereafter registered under Sections 379/411/289/34, Indian Penal Code [IPC] r/w Section 11[1][a][d] [h], Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 13[1], Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021. After seizure of the cattle, the subject-vehicle and other articles, a seizure list was prepared.

4. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cattle were purchased from Bihara Weekly Animal Selling Market. The petitioner claiming to be the owner of the 17 nos. of cattle preferred an application before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon ['the trial court', for short] seeking custody of 17 nos. of cattle so seized in connection with Nagaon Police Station Case no. 716/2022 and the said petition was registered as Petition no. 1280. Before the learned Court, the petitioner had submitted cattle purchase receipts in support of his claim of ownership of the 17 nos. of cattle.

5. The Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case reported that during inquiry, the petitioner submitted cattle purchase receipts in support of his claim for ownership and from Page No. 3/4

those documents though it was found that the petitioner was the owner of the seized cattle but sufficient document was left to be further furnished and had prayed not to give custody at that stage of investigation of the case. It was on that basis, the learned court below rejected Petition no. 1280 preferred by the petitioner.

6. Aggrieved by the rejection of the petition, i.e. Petition no. 1280 by the learned trial court by order dated 01.07.2022, the petitioner has approached this Court by this revision petition invoking the provisions quoted hereinabove.

7. Section 11[5] and Section 12 of the Assam Preservation Act, 2021, as amended, read as under :

"11. [5] On receipt of the report, the Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class may, on his being satisfied that there is enough material to presume that a prima-facie offence under this Act has been committed or intended to be committed, release the seized materials including vehicle/conveyance except cattle on furnishing of a bank guarantee, equal to the value of the material or vehicle/conveyance, to the satisfaction of the court, pending disposal of the criminal proceedings instituted in respect of the alleged offence.

12. [1] Any person aggrieved by any order passed under section 7 and section 11 may, within thirty days from the date of receipt of such order appeal to the Sessions Judge having jurisdiction over the area in which the property, to which such order relates, has been seized.

[2] The Sessions Judge may, after giving the persons affected a reasonable opportunity of being heard, pass such order as it deems fit."

8. In view of such availability of the statutory alternative statutory remedy, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner should avail such remedy first, instead of invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, this revision petition is not Page No. 4/4

entertained, reserving the liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory alternative remedy. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits regarding the claim of the petitioner and the appellate court is at liberty to dispose of the appeal, if any preferred by the petitioner hereinafter, in accordance with law and on its own merit.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant