V.K.CHATURVEDI, J. - (1.) THIS revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 3-4-2001 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st, Saharanpur in crime No.32 of 2001 rejecting application of the revisionists for custody of bullocks under Sections 3/5/8 of Cow Slaughter Act, PS. Fatehpur, district Saharanpur.
(2.) HEARD Mr. Taha Bin Islam, learned Counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. Mr. Islam contends that the revisionists are law abiding and peace loving citizen and they have never been challenged in any case. They are Gada Muslims and are not butchers. They are agriculturists and owned land. Photo copies of the revenue records Form No. 23 are annexed as Annexures 1, 2 and 3 to the affidavit. It is next contended that the revisionists purchased four bullocks from Manzoor and Mahtab for Rs. 4,000and 4,500 respectively on 28-2-2001 for agriculture purpose. Photo copy of the receipts in this regard are filed as An-.nexures 4 and 5 to the affidavit. When the revisionists alongwith their servants were on their way to their village with bullocks from Saharanpur, they were intercepted by police who demanded money, and when they refused to pay, the revisionists were challenged in a false case under Section 3/5/8 of the Cow Slaughter Act in crime No.32/2001 by the police of P.S. Fatehpur on 2-3-2001. They were released on bail and on 28-3-2001 an application was moved on behalf of the revisionists for custody of the aforesaid bullocks which was rejected by the Court by means of the impugned order.
(3.) MR . A. P. Misra, learned A.G.A. on the basis of the averments made in the counter affidavit, has argued that the ap­plicants are professionally cow slaughters who used to purchase bullocks and cows and slaughter them in their village and that the bullocks recovered from the pos­session of the revisionists are given in the supurdagi of respectable and solvent vil­lagers who are taking proper care, feeding, fedder, health and maintenance.;