Gujarat Animal Cruelty 387518

R/CR.
MA/13978/2020 ORDER
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 13978 of 2020
==========================================================
AKRAMBHAI SHAUKATBHAI POSTI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SS SAIYED(3690) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. C.M. SHAH, APP, (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
Date : 12/01/2021
ORAL ORDER
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
1. After arguing at length, the learned
advocate Mr. Saiyed appearing for the applicant
seeks permission to withdraw the present
application, however submits that a liberty be
granted to move an application afresh if the
trial is not commenced within three months.
2. In view of the above, the permission as

sought for is granted. The present application
is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the
applicant shall be at liberty to move an
application afresh in case the trial is not
commenced within a period of six months from
today. The trial Court is directed to expedite
the trial. Rule is discharged.
3. At this juncture, the learned advocate Mr.
Page 1 of 5
Downloaded on : Fri Jan 15 15:32:15 IST 2021

R/CR.MA/13978/2020 ORDER
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Saiyed appearing for the applicant requested the
Court to pass a reasoned order. Normally such a
request after passing of the above order could
not be entertained by the Court, however without
stretching the matter any further, following
order is passed : -
4. The present application has been filed by

the applicant – original accused seeking his
release on bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. in
connection with the offence registered as I-C.R.
No. 11821035200081 of 2020 at the Limkheda
Police Station, District Dahod for the offences
punishable under Sections 11(1)(d), 11(1)(e),
11(1)(f) and 11(1)(h) of the Prevention of
Animal Cruelty Act and Section 6A(4), 6(1)(3)
and 8(2) of the Animal Preservation Act.
5. It may be noted that earlier the applicant

had preferred an application being Criminal
Misc. Application No. 11090 of 2020 in which the
Court had passed the following order : -
“Learned advocate Mr. Bhoharia for the

applicant seeks permission to withdraw the
present application at this stage with a
view to file appropriate application before
the appropriate court after the chargesheet
is filed.
In view of the above, the present
application is dismissed as withdrawn at
this stage.”
6. The present application therefore has been

filed after the filing of chargesheet against
Page 2 of 5

WWW.LIVELAW.IN
the applicant – accused. From the documents on
record, more particularly from the complaint, it
appears that on 01.03.2020, the complainant
Niteshbhai Kanubhai along with his fellow
Constables who were on duty, on receipt of a
message on telephone, had kept a watch and tried
to intercept a truck bearing registration No.
GJ-15-Z-1251 going from Dahod towards Godhra in
presence of the panch witnesses, however, the
driver of the truck had not stopped the truck.
The complainant and others having chased the
truck, the driver stopped the truck, however,
ran away towards the forest taking undue
advantage of the darkness. In the truck it was
found that the legs and neck of 15 cows and 7
calves in all 22 animals were tied with ropes in
a very cruel manner, and there was no provision
for grass or water, and that they were being
carried for slaughtering purpose. During the
course of the investigation, it was revealed
that the present applicant – accused was the
owner of the said truck and was driving the said
truck at the time of incident in question. The
Investigating Officer therefore had arrested the
accused by transfer warrant as he was also
arrested in some other case.
7. It is sought to be submitted by the learned

advocate Mr. Saiyed for the applicant that there
was no evidence collected by the Investigating
Officer to show that the animals were being
Page 3 of 5

WWW.LIVELAW.IN
carried by the applicant for slaughtering
purpose. According to him, he was doing the
business of buying and selling the animals, and
was not involved in slaughtering activity. He
further submitted that he was falsely implicated
in the present case as he was arrested in one
another case of similar nature.
8. However, the learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah

appearing for the respondent – State submitted
that applicant is a habitual offender and has
also been involved in the other case of similar
nature. She also drew attention of the Court to
the amendment made in the Gujarat Animal
Preservation (Amendment) Act, 2017, in which the
punishment under Section 8 of the said Act has
been increased from seven years to the life
imprisonment.
9. In the instant case, it is not disputed that

the applicant was involved in one another case
registered as C.R. No.I-11207002200099 of 2020
at the Godhra B Division Police Station,
District Godhra with regard to the offences
punishable under the said Acts, and that he was
arrested in this case by transfer warrant when
he was in custody in the said case. It also
appears that the applicant was absconding after
the alleged incident and was arrested only in
July, 2020. From the papers of chargesheet
also, it appears that the applicant was the
Page 4 of 5

WWW.LIVELAW.IN
owner of the truck intercepted by the
complainant and was himself driving the said
truck in which the animals were subjected to
cruelty. Therefore, there is a prima facie
involvement of the applicant found in the
alleged offences. It is needless to say that
the animals, like the human beings have the
capability of comprehending the physical and
mental pain and that they do feel severity of
the physical harm inflicted on them. The said
Acts have been enacted to punish severely the
persons indulging in such cruelty to the
animals.
10. Hence, considering the gravity and

seriousness of the offences alleged against the
applicant and the punishment prescribed for the
said offences, the Court is not inclined to
grant the bail to the present applicant. In that
view of the matter, the application is
dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J)
AMAR SINGH
WWW.LIVELAW.IN
Page 5 of 5

Gujarat Animal Cruelty 387518

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gujarat Animal Cruelty 387518

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gujarat Animal Cruelty 387518

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

R/CR.

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 13978 of 2020

2. In view of the above, the permission as

3. At this juncture, the learned advocate Mr.

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 15 15:32:15 IST 2021

4. The present application has been filed by

5. It may be noted that earlier the applicant

“Learned advocate Mr. Bhoharia for the

6. The present application therefore has been

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 15 15:32:15 IST 2021

7. It is sought to be submitted by the learned

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 15 15:32:15 IST 2021

8. However, the learned APP Ms. C.M. Shah

9. In the instant case, it is not disputed that

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 15 15:32:15 IST 2021

10. Hence, considering the gravity and

Downloaded on : Fri Jan 15 15:32:15 IST 2021

You might also like