RAMJILAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by petitioner Ramjilal, against the judgment dated October 17, 2008 of Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1 Sikar Camp Neemka -Thana in Sessions Case No. 24/2007 wherein accused respondent No. 2 was acquitted of the charge under Sections 3/8 of the Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter and Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995 (in Short Bovine Animal Act).

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that on August 12, 2008 at 10.00 a.m. a written report was prepared that Bijendra Singh son of Kalyan Singh resident of village Jilo beating a cow indiscriminately by stone over eye, vertebra bone and tongue. The cow is lying in. Jilo School waiting for her last breath. Signature over this report was made by Mahatma Bairam on August 14, 2007. Names of two witnesses namely Malaram and Saitan. Gurjar was made as witnesses. This report was registered by the Incharge Police Station Patan on August 4, 2007 at 3.45 p.m. Crime details form was prepared by the Police Station along with site plan on August 14, 2007. Dr. Vinod Kumar Tyagi on August 14, 2007 at 4.30 p.m. prepared injury report Ex.P.3 at Primary Jilo School where cow was lying alive. He found following injuries: Injury by the blunt object on the Lumber region measures about 1.5 cm. x 1.0 cm. There may be fracture of the Colossal Lumber vertebrae so that animal unable to move. injury on the skull Blood was oozing out from both the Nostrils. Injury on the Right side of the thorax region and abdomen Age of injuries 48 hours. Place was shown at Jeelo Primary School.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that the court below without going through' the entire record and evidence wrongly acquitted the accused respondents for offence under Section 3/8 of the Bovine Animal Act. The court below while passing the impugned order did not consider the statements of witnesses in correct perspective. Thus the judgment of the court below is liable to be set aside and the accused respondent should be convicted for the offences charged against him.