Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9242 Court No. - 14 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 376 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rehan Waris @ Tajju Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.Home Lko And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Riyaz Ahmad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with following relief: "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of quashing the order dated 02.01.2024 passed by the Commissioner, Devipatan Devision, Gonda vide case No. 1297 of 2023 (Rehan Waris @ Tajju Vs. State of U.P. under Sections 5(ka)(8) U.P. Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 rejecting the revision filed by the petitioner as well as the judgment and order dated 25.7.2023 passed by District Magistrate, Gonda vide Case No. 00987 of 2021, in case State Vs. Rehan Waris Under Section 5(Ka) U.P. Cow Slaughter Act, rejecting the application of the petitioner. (ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in this case, he is registered owner of the vehicle bearing no. UP41AT2508 and also drives the vehicle himself and on the date of incident, he was carrying the vehicle unloaded. On the way, the police stopped him with ulterior motive and seized the vehicle. No animals were being transported in the vehicle at the time of alleged incident. Case does not come under the provisions of Cow Slaughter Act. No animal was found loaded in the vehicle either tied or untied. From the F.I.R., it is clear that the animals said to be transported in the vehicle could not be identified by the police. As per version in the F.I.R. tied animals were untied by the police, then they ran away, therefore, their description could not be mentioned. In this way, it cannot be said that cow progeny were being carried in the vehicle. Further it is submitted that for release of vehicle, the petitioner moved an application before the District Magistrate which was rejected vide order dated 25.07.2023 against which revision was filed before the Commissioner which was also rejected vide order dated 02.01.2024 without considering the facts as aforesaid, therefore, request to release the vehicle in favour of the petitioner as being registered owner. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid but could not dispute the fact that the animals said to be transported in the vehicle could not be identified by the police as being progeny of cow. On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, the orders passed by District Magistrate and Commissioner, it appears that the animals said to be transported could not be identified by the police as to whether they belonged to progeny of cow or some other animal. In considered opinion of this Court, without ascertaining the fact that animals carried in the vehicle belonged to cow progeny or some other, the order passed by the District Magistrate as well as Commissioner cannot be said to be lawful and are liable to be set aside and petition be allowed. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and orders dated 25.07.2023 and 02.01.2024 are set aside. Vehicle bearing no. UP41AT2508 shall be released in favour of the registered owner (petitioner) on the terms as specified by the learned Magistrate. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench