Uttarakhand High Court
7 May vs Vijay Kumar on 7 May, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:3613
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 131 of 2024
07 May, 2025
State Of Uttarakhand
--Applicant
Versus
Vijay Kumar
--Respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Vipul Painuly, learned AGA for the State/appellant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
This application preferred under Section 482
Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated
09.11.2023, passed by learned Sessions Judge,
Rudraprayag in Criminal Revision No.13 of 2023, Vijay
Kumar vs. State, relating to offence punishable under
Sections 429 IPC r/w Section 11 of the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (for short "The Act, 1960").
2. The facts in brief are that an FIR was lodged on
22.09.2023 by one Varun Raj Singh against the
respondent and others that five mules/houses were being
checked while taking the passengers towards Kedarnath.
On checking, the animals were found to be injured and
were in a very weak condition. The owner of the animals
could not produce any registration or licence.
Accordingly, those animals were taken into custody and
were sent to Gaurikund. On examination by veterinary
officer, the animals were reported to be medically unfit.
3. On that FIR, the investigation began which
resulted into submission of a charge-sheet. During
pendency of a trial, an application was moved by the
respondent/owner of the mule for release of the three
2025:UHC:3613
mules in his favour. The said application was rejected by
learned Judicial Magistrate, Ukhimath, Rudraprayag by
his order dated 26.10.2023. Challenging the said order,
respondent preferred a revision, which was registered as
a Criminal Revision No.13 of 2023 before the Sessions
Judge, Rudraprayag. Learned Sessions Judge by his
judgment and order dated 09.11.2023 has allowed the
revision, set-aside the order dated 26.10.2023 passed by
trial court and directed for release of mules in favour of
respondent subject to certain conditions as mentioned in
the impugned order. Challenging the said order, the State
has come up in this C482 application.
4. The reasons for releasing the mules as
assigned, by learned Sessions Judge, are that the
accused is to be tried for an offence punishable under
Section 11(1)(b) of the Act, 1960. The prosecution could
not produce any evidence which could prove that the
respondent had been convicted in such type of offence.
The challanee report had already been filed in the court.
The revisional court relying upon the authority of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Manager, Pinjrapole Deudar
& another vs. Chakram Moraji Nat & Others; reported on
(1998) 6 SCC 520. Para 10 has also strengthened its
judgment.
5. On a bare perusal of the impugned order,
passed by learned revisional court, this Court is of the
firm opinion that no loss has been caused to the State.
The animals belong to the respondent, who can well
maintain them as he is the best person for the same.
Moreover, while releasing the animals in favour of
respondent, four conditions have also been imposed, one
of which, relates to the fact of submission of undertaking
by the respondent that he shall not commit any type of
2025:UHC:3613
cruelty with the animals and would properly maintain
them and further would also follow the instructions
issued in this regard by the competent authority from
time to time.
6. In such view of the matter, the order passed by
learned revisional court does not suffer from any
infirmity. The C482 application filed by the State is bereft
of any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.
7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
07.05.2025
AK
