Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010172342026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1150/2026 MD. NABAB SIRAJUDDIN ALIAS MD. SIRAJ UDDIN S/O MD. AKBAR ALI, R/O VILL- HATIPARA, P.S. RUPAHIHAT, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 2:(H.C.) JODU GOGOI HAWAJAN POLICE STATION P.S.- GOHPUR DISTRICT- BISWANATH ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J C BORAH, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 19.08.2026 Heard Mr. J. C. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. K. Parashar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Page No.# 2/5 2. In this petition, under Section 582 of the BNSS, 2023, the petitioner, namely, Md. Nabab Sirajuddin @ Md. Siraj Uddin, has challenged the Order, dated 08.04.2026, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Gohpur, in Petition No. 78/2026, whereby, prayer of the petitioner, seeking custody of 8 (eight) Nos. of cattle, seized in connection with Gohpur P.S. Case No. 28/2026; has been rejected. 3. Mr. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased the aforesaid cattle from Silapathar market and he has produced the relevant documents before the learned SDMJ (M), Gohpur. But, despite production of such documents, the learned SDMJ (M), Gohpur had dismissed the petition, vide Order, dated 08.04.2026, on the ground that as per Health Certificate of the seized cattle, provided by the Veterinary officer on 04.03.2026, five cows were stated to be white, one was fawn, one was brown and white, and another one was blackish brown; and that the description given by the petitioner does not match with the seized cattle, as the photographs submitted by the I.O. at the time of the seizure, matches with the description given on the report, dated 04.03.2026; and also on the ground that releasing of the seized cattle is against the principle laid down in the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, and Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. 3.1 Mr. Borah also submits that the finding, so recorded by the learned Magistrate, is contrary to the settle proposition of law and that the petitioner will produce the cattle before the Court as and when directed and as such, he submits that interim custody of the cattle may be given to the petitioner. 3.2 It is the further submission of Mr. Borah that presently, the cattle is being Page No.# 3/5 held in Gaushala and the petitioner has to pay the cost for their maintenance and under such circumstances, he has contended to allow this petition. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Parashar, learned APP has vehemently opposed the petition. He submits that under Section 11(5) of the Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, the cattle seized in connection with the offences committed under the said Act, cannot be released and therefore, he has contended to dismiss the petition. 5. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also gone through the relevant provision of law, i.e., the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021 and Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. 6. It appears that the case, in connection to which the cattle was seized, was registered under Sections 302(2)/317(2)/3(5) BNS, 2023, read with Section 13(1) of Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, read with Section 11(1)(a)(d) of the Prevention to Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. 7. It is well settled that in order to attract Section 13 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, one has to contravere the provision of Sections 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 of the said Act. And a bare perusal of the impugned order dated 08.04.2026, reveals that no such satisfaction is recorded by the learned Trial Court, about contravention of the provision under Sections 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8, and without recording such satisfaction, it cannot be said that the impugned order, so passed by the learned Trial Court, withstands the test of legality, propriety and correctness. Page No.# 4/5 8. It is also to be noted here that Section 4 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, deals with prohibition of slaughter of cattle; Section 5 of the said Act deals with prohibition of slaughter of cattle without certificate from competent authority; Section 6 of the said Act deals with slaughter of cattle in place, other than a Slaughter House; Section 7 of the said Act deals with prohibition of transport of cattle without valid permit; and Section 8 of the said Act deals with prohibition of sale of beef and beef products. 9. In the FIR of the instant case, there is no whisper about commission of the said offences. It only indicates carrying of the cattle in the vehicle, without proper document, space, food, water and hygiene. There is also no allegation of violation of permit in the FIR. 10. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that even if, as submitted by Mr. Parashar, learned APP, there is a bar in releasing the cattle under Section 11(5) of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, the same would not stand in the way of releasing the cattle in the custody of the petitioner, in absence of any allegation of contravention of the provision of Section 13 of the Act. Mere mentioning of the section is not sufficient. Basic ingredients of the offences alleged, must be there. And the petitioner has produced all the relevant documents of purchasing the same from Silapathar market, before this Court. 11. Accordingly, taking note of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also considering the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, it is provided that the cattle seized here in this case, as per Seizure List dated 03.03.2026, and as per the description made in the said list, shall be released in Page No.# 5/5 the interim custody of the petitioner, on furnishing a Bank Guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/-, subject to the condition that he has to produce the same before the learned Trial Court, as and when directed. 12. In terms of the above, this criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant