Uttarakhand High Court
Ragib vs State Of Uttarakhand on 30 April, 2024
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Revision No. 241 of 2024
With
IA No.1 of 2024 for Bail Application
Ragib ......Revisionist
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand ....Respondent
Present:
Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate for the revisionist.
Ms. Manisha Rana Singh for the State.
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The challenge in this revision is made to the
following:-
(i) Judgment and order dated 25.10.2021,
passed in Criminal Case No. 604 of 2020,
State Vs. Ragib, by the court of Judicial
Magistrate/ I Additional Civil Judge (Junior
Division), Roorkee, District Haridwar
Haridwar ("the case"). By it, the revisionist
has been convicted under Section 5/11(1) of
the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny
Act, 2007, and sentenced him to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of three
years with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of
payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of six months;
(ii) Judgment and order dated 02.04.2024,
passed in Criminal Appeal No. 153 of 2021,
Ragib Vs. State of Uttarakhand, by the court
of II Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee,
Haridwar ("the appeal"). By it, the order
passed in the case was affirmed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit
that in such cases, probation may be granted.
4. The LCR is before the Court. The Court has
perused the record.
5. It is a case of recovery of beef in a car. PW3 has
proved the first enquiry report as Ex. A4, which concludes
that there is a possibility that the recovered belongs to an
animal of cow progeny. Can it be said to be a proof beyond
reasonable doubt? It requires deliberations.
6. Admit.
7. List this matter for final hearing on 14.07.2024.
Heard on Bail Application No. 1 of 2024
8. The challenge in this revision is made to the
conviction and sentence of the revisionist recorded in
Criminal Case No. 604 of 2020, State Vs. Ragib, by the
court of Judicial Magistrate/ I Additional Civil Judge
(Junior Division), Roorkee, District Haridwar ("the case").
By it, the revisionist has been convicted under Section
5/11(1) of the Uttarakhand Protection of Cow Progeny Act,
2007, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of three years with a fine of Rs.
5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of six months, as well as
judgment and order dated 02.04.2024, passed in Criminal
Appeal No. 153 of 2021, Ragib Vs. State of Uttarakhand, by
the court of II Additional Sessions Judge, Roorkee,
Haridwar ("the appeal"). By it, the order passed in the case
was affirmed.
9. The first enquiry report, Ex.A4, as proved by
PW3, does not conclusively opine that the recovered meat is
beef.
10. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit
that the revisionist has been on bail throughout during trial
or in appeal.
11. Having considered, this Court is of the view that
the revisionist is entitled to bail. Accordingly, the bail
application deserves to be allowed.
12. The bail application is allowed.
13. The execution of sentence appealed against shall
remain suspended until the conclusion of the revision.
14. Let the revisionist-Ragib be released on bail,
during the pendency of this revision, on his executing a
personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of
the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned
and also subject to the deposition of fine.
(Ravindra Maithani,J.)
30.04.2024
Ravi Bisht
