HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7918 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of the instant application, the applicant has challenged the validity of the order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Sultanpur in Case No.4181/2024 under Section 5-A of the U.P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 1955') and validity of the order dated 18.08.2025 passed by the Commissioner, Ayodhya Region, Ayodhya in Case No.789/2025 under Section 5A(8) of the Act of 1955. 3. The case was instituted by the Sub-Inspector of Police on 13.01.2024, narrating the allegation that truck container bearing registration No.UP21- BN/9034, was found involved, in carrying cow progenies for the purpose of slaughtering and recovery has also been done from the vehicle. 4. The aforesaid vehicle was seized where-after a release application was moved before the District Magistrate, wherein the District Magistrate passed the order dated 17.03.2025 and confiscated the vehicle. 5. Under the Act of 1955, there is a provision of confiscation of vehicle used in slaughtering of cow/cow progeny as a preventive measure and the intent of the Legislature is to stop slaughtering of cow/cow progeny and in such activity involvement of the vehicle be deprecated. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arti Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Nadeem .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. The law rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujrat 2002 10 SCC 283 and by this Court in the case of Kalia Vs. State of U.P. in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.6826/2023 decided on 06.10.2023 it has been held that it is of no use to keep the seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period of time and, therefore, the Magistrate concerned is empowered to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for release of such vehicles, if required at the relevant point of time, and this can be done pending hearing of the applications for return of such vehicles. 7. 7. In view of the foregoing reasons, particularly, the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujrat (supra), seizure of the vehicle for long period of time is not justiceable and conclusion of trial cannot be waited for. 8. The District Magistrate as well as the appellate authority, without considering the aforesaid settled proposition of law, has proceeded in the matter. 9. Consequently, this Court is of the considered opinion that both the above impugned orders are unsustainable in the eyes of law. 10. Thus, the application is allowed and the impugned orders dated 17.03.025 and 18.08.2025 passed by the District Magistrate, Sultanpur and the Commissioner, Ayodhya Region, Ayodhya respectively are hereby quashed. 11. The District Magistrate, Sultanpur is directed to pass order for release of the vehicle in question in favour of the applicant after taking security from him as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujrat (supra), within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, along with an application with prayer of release of the vehicle in question. September 17, 2025 MVS/- A482 No. 7918 of 2025 2 (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench