Allahabad High Court refuses to quash proceedings against accused found in possession of beef and live cattle

The Allahabad High Court recently refused to quash criminal proceedings against persons accused of possessing beef, and 16 live cattle without license to run a slaughter house [Parvez Ahmad v State of UP]..Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal observed that for the court to quash any criminal proceeding by exercising its powers Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the allegations taken at their face value should not prima facie constitute an offence. "The dictum of Apex Court is that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be invoked in exceptional cases where no offence is made out or the allegation in the report on face of it does not constitute any offence then such proceedings can be quashed," the High Court said..Therefore, considering that a prima facie cognizable offence was made out against the applicants and there being serious allegations, no ground was made out for quashing the proceedings"In the present case, the applicants had tried to set up defence by bringing on record the report of FSL, but the First Information Report not only discloses the recovery of the cow meat but also 16 live cattle stocks along with other incriminating material," observed the single-judge..The issue arose for consideration when a complaint was registered against ten persons including the present applicants for possessing beef and live-stock.A case was registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and the Environment (Protection) Act. Proceedings in the case were before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau..The applicants placed heavy reliance on the report of the Forensic Investigation Laboratory which found that the sample of beef sent was not from a cow. However, the State argued that it was wrong to say that the report gave a clean chit to the applicants since apart from the meat, 16 cattle were found in their possession which included a cow and a calf. .Justice Agarwal therefore, found that the applicants failed to point out that the allegations did not constitute any offence or make out a case against them, or that the allegations were so absurd that no person could reach the conclusion that there was sufficient ground to proceed. With this, their defence and the application was rejected."The defence so raised by the applicants will be considered by the trial court and such defence set up in the present application cannot be considered by this Court at this stage, at the stage of quashing of the charge sheet," the Court held..The applicants were represented by advocates Nasira Adil and Mohd Zubair, while the State was represented by government advocate Roopak Chaubey..[Read Order]