Jharkhand High Court
Fizul Shah @ Fizul Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... ... ... on 8 January, 2024
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 815 of 2016
1. Fizul Shah @ Fizul Khan
2. Md. Raju Ansari @ Nazir Ansari
3. Md. Samsul Haque
4. Md. Saukat Ansari ..... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... ... Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Amit Kumar Choubey, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
------
09/ 08.01.2024 Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Choubey, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned A.P.P.
for the State.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire
criminal proceedings, in connection with Sisai P.S. Case No. 122 of
2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 759 of 2012, pending in the court of
learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gumla.
3. The FIR was lodged on the basis of written report
submitted by one Shivjee Singh. It has been stated therein by the
informant that on 20.9.2012 in course of patrolling he got
confidential information that cattles are being loaded in village
Langta Pabya and the same will be transported to slaughter house
for the purpose of slaughtering .The informant apprised this fact to
the Officer Incharge and proceeded for destination. The informant
reached village Langta Pabya and found that on truck number JH
02P 9003 cattles were loaded when the driver was taking the
vehicle towards Bhandra. The informant has further stated that
with the help of police force cattles and the persons who were
taking the cattle were apprehended who disclosed their names as
Md. Samsul, Md. Saukat, Md. Raju Ansari and they further disclosed
the name of truck owner as Md. Fizalu Khan who fled away with the
truck. The aforesaid persons also could not produce any paper with
regard to the cattle. The informant found 6 buffaloes which were
seized by the police and the apprehended persons disclosed that
they were taking the cattle for the purpose of slaughtering.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits
that the buffaloes are not coming within the definition of Jharkhand
Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005. He submits that
Section 414 of the IPC is not attracted as there is no allegation of
stealing the property. On these grounds, he submits that the entire
criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed.
4. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State submits that the
case is made out, in view of that the FIR may not be quashed.
5. In the FIR, there is allegation of smuggling the bovine
animals by the accused persons with cruelty. The driver tried to
escape by way of running the vehicle, however, the police has
apprehended the said vehicle and seized the same. Thus, the
allegations are there.
6. As per the definition, bovine animals includes cow, calf,
heifer, bull or bullock only. In law the term 'animals' includes all
creatures of the animal world not belonging to human race, and is
used throughout this title except where a specially restricted
meaning is appropriate. In law animals are divided into two classes,
domestic and wild, and this classification affects the right of
property in them and also a liability for their behaviour. Subject
matter of the present Act refers to domestic specifically bovine
animals which includes all those domestic or tame animals as by
habit or training live in association with man. An animal does not
exist in a wild state anywhere in the world is in law a domestic
animal. It is a question of law, not fact, whether an animal is within
class of domestic or bovine animals or wild animals. The expression
'species of bovine cattle' is wide enough to include and does in
ordinary parlance include buffaloes (male or female, adults or
calves). Reference may be made to the case of State of Bihar Versus
Murad Ali Khan, reported in AIR 1989 SC 1.
7. In the present case only the FIR is under challenge and
in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
State of Bihar Versus Murad Ali Khan (Supra), no case of
interference is made out. As such, this petition is dismissed.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Amitesh/-
