1 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) 2025:CGHC:37306 अप्रतिवेद्य छत्ती सगढ़ उच्च न्यायालया , तिलसपुर दाण्डिक प्रक र्ण" यातिचक क्रमां%क -2156/2025 1. ह खान तिपु-अ0 मांहरू नरूद्दी न, उम्र-लगभग 50 वेर्ष", तिनवेस -वे" क्रमां%क-17, दाग" च7क, ल7दाजार, जिजाल-ल7दाजार, छत्ती सगढ़ । -----यातिचकक"/आवेदाक तिवेरूद्घ 1. छत्ती सगढ़ रज्या द्वार आरक्षी क न्द्र-जिसटी कBवेल , मां%गल , जिजाल-मां%गल , छत्ती सगढ़ -----प्रत्यार्थीE/रज्या यातिचकक"/आवेदाक द्वार : श्री अ%क र दा वेन, अजिHवेक्ता । रज्या/प्रत्यार्थीE द्वार : श्री अजिखालश क मांर, शसक या अजिHवेक्ता । मांनन या न्यायामां0ति" श्री स%जाया क मांर जायासवेल , न्यायाH श !! आदाश पु ठ पुर पुरिर !! 30/07/2025 1. उभयापुक्षी कB सन गया । 2. भर या नगरिरक सरक्षी स%तिह, 2023 क Hर-528 क ह प्रस् इस यातिचक मांR यातिचकक" द्वार जाब्शदा वेहन टीTक क्रमां%क-स .जा .-04.-जा. .-7825 कB POMAN DEWANGAN Digitally signed by POMAN DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.01 10:50:16 +0530 2 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) सपुदा"नमां पुर तिदाए जान तिनवेदान तिकया गया हX । सर्थी ह , सत्र न्यायाH श, मां%गल , जिजाल-मां%गल , छत्ती सगढ़ द्वार आपुरजिHक पुनर क्षीर्ण क्रमां%क-08/2025 “ह खान तिवेरूद्घ छत्ती सगढ़ रज्या" मांR पुरिर आदाश तिदान%क-13/05/2025 कB चन7 दा गई हX । 3. प्रकरर्ण क थ्या स%क्षीपु मांR इस प्रकर ह^ तिक तिदान%क-4 वे 5/08/2024 क दारम्यान र अतिभयाक्ता दावेरजा उक्ता टीTक मांR कर 13 मांवेतिशया` कB भरकर पुरिरवेहन कर रह र्थी । ग्रामां- भटीग%वे क पुस र मांR लगभग 11:50 जा प्रर्थीE पुक्षी द्वार वेहन कB रBकन क प्रयास तिकया गया, तिक% अतिभयाक्ता दावेरजा टीTक लकर भगन लग । उसक पु छ कर हbए पुर्थीरिरया मांBड़, रयापुर रB पुर उक्ता वेहन कB रBक गया । इस स%%H मांR जिलजिखा तिशकया र्थीन-मां%गल , जिजाल-मां%गल , छत्ती सगढ़ मांR तिदान%क-05/08/2024 कB करन पुर अपुरH क्रमां%क-312/2024 अ%ग" Hर-11(1) पुशओं% क प्रति क्र0 र क तिनवेरर्ण अजिHतिनयामां, 1960 (जिजास आग स%क्षीपु मांR "अजिHतिनयामां, 1960” स स%BजिH तिकया जा रह हX) र्थी Hर-4, 6, 10 छत्ती सगढ़ कi तिर्षक पुश पुरिररक्षीर्ण अजिHतिनयामां, 2004 (जिजास आग स%क्षीपु मांR "अजिHतिनयामां, 2004” स स%BजिH तिकया जा रह हX) क ह अपुरH पु%जा द्घ तिकया गया । मांवेतिशया` क जाब् क गई, सतिक्षीया` क यान जिलए गए र्थी आवेदाक/यातिचकक" क भ कर्थीन जिलया गया । पुश्च मांR तिदान%क-23/03/2025 कB उक्ता टीTक क जाब् र्थीन पुरिरसर स क गई, अन्या सह-अतिभयाक्तागर्ण क भ तिगरफ्र क गई, जाब् मांवेतिशया` मांR स एक मांi गया क शवे क पुर क्षीर्ण करया गया और स%पु0र्ण" तिवेवेचन उपुर% तिदान%क-28/05/2025 कB न्यायालया मांR अतिभयाBगपुत्र पुश तिकया गया । 4. यातिचकक"/आवेदाक द्वार जाब् उक्ता टीTक कB सपुदा"नमां मांR प्रप्त करन वेस् तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया क समांक्षी उक्ता टीTक क दास्वेज़ों` क सर्थी ह आवेदान प्रस् तिकया गया । 3 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया द्वार एमां०जा०स ० क्रमां%क-680/2025 “ह खान तिवेरूद्घ छत्ती सगढ़ रज्या" मांR तिदान%क-19/03/2025 कB आदाश पुरिर कर हbए सपुदा"नमां आवेदान खारिरजा कर तिदाया गया । जिजास पुनर क्षीर्ण मांR चन7 तिदाए जान पुर सत्र न्यायाH श, मां%गल , जिजाल-मां%गल , छत्ती सगढ़ द्वार आपुरजिHक पुनर क्षीर्ण क्रमां%क-08/2025 “ह खान तिवेरूद्घ छत्ती सगढ़ रज्या" मांR तिदान%क-13/05/2025 कB आदाश पुरिर कर पुनर क्षीर्ण आवेदान भ तिनरस् कर तिदाया गया । जिजास आदाश कB इस यातिचक मांR चन7 दा हbए जाब्शदा वेहन कB सपुदा"नमां मांR तिदाए जान क तिनवेदान तिकया गया हX । 5. यातिचकक"/आवेदाक क तिवेद्वान अजिHवेक्ता क क" हX तिक यातिचकक"/आवेदाक अतिवेवेतिदा रूपु मांR उक्ता जाब्शदा वेहन टीTक क पु%जा कi स्वेमां हX । उसन उक्ता वेहन तिकरयानमां अन%H क ह तिदान%क-08/07/2024 कB अतिभयाक्ता दावेरजा कB तिदाया र्थी । अतिभयाक्ता दावेरजा इस मांमांल मांR आरBपु हX जातिक यातिचकक"/आवेदाक स्वेया% इस मांमांल मांR अतिभयाBजिजा नहp तिकया गया हX । उस वेहन मांR पुशओं% क पुरिरवेहन तिकए जान क तिवेर्षया मांR कBई जानकर नहp हX । वेहन जाब् तिदान%क-05/08/2024 स पुजिलस र्थीन मांR हX । खाल स्र्थीन मांR खाड़ रहन स वेहन क क्षीति स%भतिवे हX । अतिभयाBगपुत्र न्यायालया मांR प्रस् हB चक हX । प्रकरर्ण क तिवेचरर्ण मांR समांया लगन स%भतिवे हX । उसक वेहन जाब् हbए कर 01 वेर्ष" हBन कB हX । तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया र्थी पुनर क्षीर्ण न्यायालया क तिनष्कर्ष" तिवेजिH क दृतिs मांR वेXH एवे% उतिच नहp हX । अt वे आदाश अपुस् कर हbए उस वेहन सपुदा"नमां मांR प्रदान तिकया जाए । 6. रज्या/उत्तीरवेदा क तिवेद्वान अजिHवेक्ता न क" तिकया हX तिक उपुरBक्ता वेहन मांR 13 मांवेतिशया` कB तिन चर-पुन एवे% सरतिक्षी व्यावेस्र्थी क क्र0 र पु0वे"क ठ0%सकर कत्लखान ल जाया जा रह 4 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) र्थी, जिजासस एक गया क मांiत्या एवे% एक अन्या गया भ घायाल हbई हX । वेहन क तिवेजिHवे जाब् तिदान%क-23/03/2025 कB क गई हX, अt अभ 06 मांह क न्या0नमां समांयावेजिH पु0र्ण" नहp हbई हX । तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया एवे% पुनर क्षीर्ण न्यायालया द्वार पुरिर आदाश उतिच वे वेXH हX । अt याह यातिचक खारिरजा क जाए । 7. उभयापुक्षी कB सन गया र्थी अतिभलखा वे क स यार क पुरिरश लन तिकया गया । 8. The Act of 2004 has been enacted in the interest of the general public and to maintain communal harmony and peace, for prohibition of slaughter of agricultural cattle. Section 6 of the Act of 2004 provides prohibition on transport of agricultural cattle for slaughter. At this stage, it would be appropriate to notice the provisions contained in Section 6 of the Act of 2004 which reads as under: - “6. Prohibition on transport of Agricultural cattle for slaughter:— (1) No person shall sell, or transport or offer to transport or cause to be transported any Agricultural cattle from any place within the state to any place within the state or outside the State, for the purpose of its slaughter in contravention of the provision of this Act or with the knowledge that it will be or is likely to be, so slaughtered. (2) Whenever any person transports or causes to be transported in contravention of provisions of sub- section (1) any agricultural cattle as specified in the Schedule, such vehicle or any conveyance used in transporting such animal along with such 5 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) agricultural cattle shall be liable to be seized by such authority or officer as the State Government may appoint in this behalf. (3) The vehicle or conveyance so seized under sub- section (2) shall not be released by the order of the court on bond or surety before the expiry of six months from the date of such seizure or till the final judgment of the court, whichever is earlier and such vehicle shall also be liable for confiscation at the end of the trial.” 9. A focused perusal of Section 6(1) of the Act of 2004, would show that the provision bars transport, possession and sale of cattle for the purpose of slaughter or with the knowledge that the same may be slaughtered. Mere transport of cattle from one place to another for the purpose other than slaughter is not barred under the Act and in that case the provision under Section 6(3) of the Act of 2004 would not be applicable. 10. It is well settled law that penal statutes are to be strictly construed. When a specific word has been inserted by the legislature, the provision cannot be given a different meaning. In the matter of W. H. King v. Republic of India and another1, their Lordships of the Supreme Court pertinently observed as under:- “10. As the statute creates an offence and imposes a penalty of fine and imprisonment, the words of the section must be strictly construed in favour of the subject. We are not concerned so much with 1 AIR 1952 SC 156 6 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) what might possibly have been intended as with what has been actually said in and by the language employed.” 11. Similarly, in the matter of State of West Bengal and others v. Swapan Kumar Guha and others2, the Supreme Court held as under:- “15. … when it is said that penal statutes must be construed strictly, what is meant is that the court must see that the thing charged is an offence within the plain meaning of the words used and it must not strain the words : “To put it in other words, the rule of strict construction requires that the language of a statute should be so construed that no case shall be held to fall within it which does not come within the reasonable interpretation of the statute”, and that in case of doubt, the construction favourable to the subject should be preferred. But I do not think that this rule of strict interpretation of penal statutes in any way affects the fundamental principle of interpretation, that the primary test which can safely be applied is the language used in the Act and, therefore, when the words are clear and plain, the court must accept the expressed intention of the legislature. ...” 12. The pari materia provision contained in clause (4) of Section 6(A) of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954 came up for consideration before the Gujarat High Court in Ravidasbhai Segjibhai Vasava v. State of Gujarat, 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 14545 in which the Gujarat High 2 (1982) 1 SCC 561 7 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) Court considering the issue identical as involved in the present case held that clause (4) of Section 6(A) would apply only in a case where the animals are being transported for the purpose of slaughter. It has been observed in paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the report as under:- “10. The plain reading of section 6(A) clause (1) would indicate that the same is applicable in a case where it is found that the animals were being transported from any place within the State to any other place within the State for the purpose of slaughter in contravention of the provisions of the Act or with the knowledge that they were likely to be slaughtered. There is a proviso to section 6(A) clause (1) which provides that a person shall be deemed to be transporting such animal for the purpose of slaughter unless contrary is proved thereto to the satisfaction of the concerned authority or officer by such person or he has obtained a permission under sub-section (2) for transporting the animal for bona fide agricultural or animal husbandry purpose. 11. Clause (4) to section 6(A) puts a restriction so far as the release of the vehicle is concerned for a period of six months. 12. It is, therefore, manifest that section 6(A) clause (4) would apply only in a case where the animals are being transported for the purpose of slaughter. 13. It is not in dispute so far as the present case is concerned that no permit was obtained by the petitioner herein as the registered owner of the vehicle for the purpose of transport. However, at 8 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) the same time, the prosecution has to, prima facie, show something that the transport of the cattle was for the purpose of slaughter. For such purpose, I inquired with Mr. Dabhi, the learned APP, regarding the materials collected by the police in the course of investigation. Mr. Dabhi has fairly submitted that there is nothing to show that the cattle were being transported for the purpose of slaughter. It appears that there is no investigation in that direction. If it is the case of the prosecution that the cattle were being transported for the purpose of slaughter, then at least, it is expected from the investigating officer to investigate at which place they were being taken and were to be handed over to whom for the purpose of slaughter. There is nothing in that regard. In the absence of such material, in my view, the prosecution cannot straight way take recourse to the deeming fiction as provided under section 6(A)(1). In such circumstances, I am of the view that there should not be any legal impediment in releasing the vehicle before the expiry of the statutory time period i.e six months.” 13. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283, in para 7 and 17 has laid down guiding principles for releasing the vehicle seized by police. For Chhateady reference, the relevant portion is reproduced below:- "7. In our view, the powers under Section 451 CrPC should be exercised expeditiously and judiciously. It would serve various purposes, namely: 9 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) i. Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or by its misappropriation; ii. court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody; iii. If proper panchnama before handing over possession of the article is prepare, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of property in detail; and iv. this jurisdiction of the court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles. 17. In our view, whatever be the situation, it is of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police station for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles." 14. Similar stand has also been taken by the Supreme Court in the case of Multani Hanifbhai Kalubhai v. State of Gujarat & Another, 2013 (3) SCC 240, wherein the Supreme Court has expressed that it is not advisable to keep the seized vehicle in the Police Station in open condition which is prone to natural decay on account of whether conditions for a long period. 10 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) 15. Recently in the matter of Bishwajit Dey Vs. State of Assam, reported in (2025) 3 SCC 241, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the seized vehicle is not liable to confiscation if the owner of the seized vehicle can proved that the vehicle was used by the accused person without the owner’s knowledge and has held in paras 34, 35 & 36 as under:- “34. This Court is also of the view that if the vehicle in the present case is allowed to be kept in the custody of police till the trial is over, it will serve no purpose. This Court takes judicial notice that vehicles in police custody are stored in the open. Consequently, if the Vehicle is not released during the trial, it will be wasted and suffering the vagaries of the weather, its value will only reduce. 35. On the contrary, if the vehicle in question is released, it would be beneficial to the owner (who would be able to earn his livelihood), to the bank/financier (who would be repaid the loan disbursed by it) and to the society at large (as an additional vehicle would be available for transportation of goods). Conclusion 36. Consequently, the present Criminal Appeal is allowed with directions to the trial Court to release the vehicle in question in the interim on superdari after preparing a video and still photographs of the vehicle and after obtaining all information/documents necessary for identification of the vehicle, which shall be authenticated by the Investigating Officer, owner of the Vehicle and accused by signing the same. Further, the appellant shall not sell or 11 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) part with the ownership of the Vehicle till conclusion of the trial and shall furnish an undertaking to the trial court that he shall surrender the vehicle within one week of being so directed and/or pay the value of the vehicle (determined according to Income Tax Law on the date of its release), if so ultimately directed by the Court.” 16. Now coming to retaining the vehicle in custody, it is matter of common knowledge or experience that as and when the vehicle is seized and kept in police station, not only do they occupy substantial space in police station, but upon being kept in open place are also prone to fast natural decay on account of whether conditions. That apart, several valuable and costly parts of the said vehicle gets junked so that the vehicles become unworthy of being driven on road. Therefore, no purpose will be served to keep the vehicle in police custody for a long time as it will turn junk and also occupy the substantial place of police station. Hence, the rejection of application for interim custody cannot be allowed to sustain. 17. क स यार क पुरिरश लन स याह स्पुs हB हX तिक पुजिलस द्वार घाटीन तिदान%क- 05/08/2024 स ह उक्ता वेहन कB पुजिलस र्थीन मांR रखा गया र्थी, तिक% उसक तिवेजिHवे जाब् र्थीन मांR कर 09 मांह पुश्च तिदान%क-23/05/2025 क दाश"ई गई हX । इसजिलए रज्या क तिवेद्वान अजिHवेक्ता क याह क" स्वे कर याBग्या नहp हX तिक 06 मांह क समांया-स मां पु0र्ण" नहp हbई हX । याह भ उल्लेखान या हX तिक यातिचकक"/आवेदाक ह खान कB पुजिलस द्वार अतिभयाBजिजा नहp तिकया गया हX र्थी वेह अतिवेवेतिदा रूपु स उक्ता वेहन क 12 / 12 (Cr. M. P. No.-2156 of 2025) पु%जा कi स्वेमां या गया हX । तिकस अन्या व्यातिक्ता न उक्ता वेहन क तिवेर्षया मांR कBई दावे पुश नहp तिकया हX । प्रकरर्ण क तिवेचरर्ण मांR समांया लगन स%भतिवे हX । उपुरBक्ता तिवेजिHक प्रवेHन र्थी न्यायादृs%` क प्रकश मांR प्रकरर्ण क तिनरकरर्ण क वेहन कB अ%रिरमां अतिभरक्षी मांR तिदाया जान उतिच पुया जा हX । 18. अt याह यातिचक स्वे कर क जा हX । 19. सपुदा"नमां आवेदान क स%%H मांR तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया र्थी पुनर क्षीर्ण न्यायालया द्वार पुरिर आदाश कB अपुस् कर हbए तिनदाyतिश तिकया जा हX तिक तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया यातिक्तास%ग शz% क आHर पुर उक्ता जाब्शदा टीTक दाण्डिक प्रकरर्ण क तिनरकरर्ण क यातिचकक"/ आवेदाक क अ%रिरमां अतिभरक्षी मांR स{पु जाए । 20. उपुरBक्तानसर, इस दाण्डिक प्रक र्ण" यातिचक क तिनरकरर्ण तिकया जा हX । 21. रजिजास्टीT कB तिनदाyतिश तिकया जा हX तिक इस आदाश क प्रतिजिलतिपु यार्थीश घ्र तिवेचरर्ण न्यायालया कB स0चनर्थी" एवे% अनपुलनर्थी" प्रतिर्ष क जाए । सह /- (स%जाया क मांर जायासवेल) न्यायाH श पुBमांन