JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)RULE . Learned APP Mr. R.C. Kodekar, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent State. With the consent of the learned
Counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
(2.)BY way of the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and
order dated 26.5.2013, passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate,
First Class, Botad, in Misc. Criminal Application No.28 of 2013,
rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for releasing his Truck
bearing Regn. No.GJ-10-V-6017. The petitioner has also challenged the
judgment and order dated 9.7.2013, passed in Misc. Criminal Revision
Application No.14 of 2013, by 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Camp at
Botad, by which the Revision Application filed by the present petitioner
challenging the decision of the learned Magistrate came to be rejected
and confirmed the decision of the learned Magistrate. Hence, the present
petition.
Short facts emerge from the record that the petitioner is the owner of Truck bearing Registration No.GJ-10-V-6017 which was
illegally used for transporting animals contrary to the provisions of the
Prevention Of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and the Motor Vehicles Act. Pursuant to the FIR registered at CR No. II-28 of 2013 before
Paliyad Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 11, D, E of the Prevention Of Cruelty To Animals Act,1960 and under Sections
13, 117 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the Truck in question was seized by the Investigating Agency. The petitioner, being the owner of the said
Truck, filed an application, being Misc. Criminal Application No.28 of
2013, before the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Botad, to release the Truck. The said application was dismissed by the
learned Magistrate, vide order dated 26.5.2013, on the ground that in the
past the petitioner was also involved in similar type of offence and the
said vehicle was released in the earlier offence by imposing conditions
not to use the said vehicle for illegal activities. Since the petitioner has
committed breach of the said conditions, the learned Magistrate refused
to release the vehicle. The Revision Application which was filed by the
petitioner challenging the order of the learned Magistrate was dismissed
by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Camp at Botad, as stated
above.
(3.)HEARD Mr. M.A. Bukhari, learned Advocate, for the petitioner and Mr. L.R. Pujari, learned APP, for the respondent State.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.