Roxburgh, J. - (1.) THIS iS a rule obtained by two accused who have been convicted under B. 6, Bengal Cruelty to Animals Act, 1920, for performing "the operation called phuka" on a certain cow on lat June 1946.
(2.) THE petitioner, Subol Chandra Koley has been sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment and Keru Barik has been sentenced to pay a fine of Its. 50, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. The principal ground urged before us was that a certain note by Mr. P. J. Kerr, M. B. O. V. S., I. V. S., Veterinary Advisor to the Govern, ment of Bengal, dated nth March 1930, describing "phuka" a practice applied to milch cows, and marked as Ex. 7 in the case, was not admissible in evidence. This note describes the methods applied, and the first method described is that lips of the vulva are held in each hand and opened, the operator then blows in with his mouth closing thE lips between each blow to retain the air blown in. This is continued until the cow shows definite signs of discomfort, even pain. It is then pointed out that some operators in order to obtain a still greater degree of distension insert a piece of hollow bambuo and blow up the vagina, and the opinion is expressed that in order to produce the desired result the distension of the vagina is to be carried on until the animal is showing definite signs of discomfort amounting to pain. Therefore the practice is cruelty to animals.
(3.) THE Bengal Cruelty to Animals Act, 1920 -was amended in 1938 and the punishment under Section 6, in respect of the operation called "phuka" was enhanced and the offence was made cognisable. This was done as is well known, after some public agitation in the matter. At that time (1988) the Government Veterinary Advisor had already expressed from his knowledge his views as to the manner in which "the operation called phuka" was performed.;