Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010005222025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./6/2025 PERPETUAL SANKLY D/O KLOSTER TRON RESIDENT OF 276, LUMMAWSING, LUMAWSING, EAST KHASI HILLS, MEGHALAYA, 793022 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P P DUTTA, MS P SARMA,MS. P P DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 24.01.2025 Heard Mr. P.P. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. In this petition, under Sections 442/438 of the B.N.S.S. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has put to challenge the correctness or otherwise of the order dated 04.01.2025, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Gossaigaon in connection with Gossaigaon P.S. Case No. 202/2024, under Sections 303(2)/325/3(5) of the B.N.S. read with Page No.# 2/3 Section 11(1)(a)(b)(d)(e)(h) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act read with Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act. 3. It is to be noted here that vide order dated 04.01.2025, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Gossaigaon has dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner seeking custody of 12 numbers of camel, which were seized in connection with Gossaigaon P.S. Case No. 202/2024. 4. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the seized camel and in respect of the ownership of the same, he has produced the purchase receipts, as Annexure – 4 series, at Page Nos. 24 – 41. Mr. Dutta further submits that while the camels were being carried in a Container Truck, bearing registration No. RJ-11-GC-0823, on 24.12.2024, the police personnel of Shimultapu Outpost had intercepted the same and seized the camel. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred a petition seeking custody of the aforesaid camel before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Gossaigaon. But, vide order dated 03.01.2025, the learned trial court had dismissed the petition. 4.1. Mr. Dutta further submits that though the case has been registered under Sections 303(2)/ 325/ 3(5) of the B.N.S. read with Section 11(1)(a)(b)(d)(e) (h) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act read with Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, yet, the camel is not a wild life and schedule animal as per definition of Sub-Section 18(A) to Section 2 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act and as such, the Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act is not attracted herein this. Mr. Dutta further submits that out of 20 numbers of camel, 3 have been found dead on the very day when the camels were seized and thereafter, another 7 numbers of camel suffered demise and now, there remains only 12 numbers of camel. Mr. Dutta also submits that until and unless the camels are not released in the custody of the petitioner, the remaining camels will also suffer demise and Page No.# 3/3 thereby, irreparable loss will be caused to the petitioner. Therefore, Mr. Dutta has contended to allow the petition. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor by producing the case diary before this court, submits that the case diary is silent as to whether the seized camels will be required for the purpose of investigation or not. 6. Admittedly, the camel is not wildlife as per definition of Sub-Section 18(A) to Section 2 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act. 7. Having considered above and also considering the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and also considering the relevant documents placed on record and also considering the relevant provision of law, this court is inclined to allow this petition. 8. Accordingly, it is provided that on furnishing an indemnity bond of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Gossaigaon, the aforesaid camels shall be given in the interim custody of the petitioner after verification of relevant documents. However, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The petitioner shall produce the camels before the learned trial court as and when directed and (ii) The petitioner shall not alienate or dispose of the same without the leave of the learned trial court. 9. In terms of above, this criminal revision petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant