Allahabad High Court: Merely Possessing Transporting Cow Within State Would Not Amount To An Offence Stated Under UP Cow Slaughter Act

The Allahabad High Court in the case Kundan Yadav vs. State of U.P observed and has stated that the mere possession of live cow or bullock or merely transporting cow within Uttar Pradesh would not amount to committing, abetting or attempting in order to commit an offence as it has been stated under the UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act 1955.
The bench headed by Justice Vikram D. Chauhan in the case observed and has granted bail to one Kundan Yadav who was being arrested this year in the month of March in connection with the alleged recovery of 6 cows from the vehicle. Therefore, he was also being booked under section 3, section 5A, section 5B, section 8 of the U.P. Prevention Cow Slaughter Act, 1964 and Section 11 Prevention to Animal Cruelty Act, 1960.
The court in the case observed and has noted that the AGA had placed no material for the State in order to demonstrate that the applicant had slaughtered or caused to be slaughtered or offer or cause to be offered for the slaughter a cow, bull or bullock in any place in the Uttar Pradesh.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case made the prima facie observation that the applicant is not guilty and thus, the court granted him bail.
Further, the Allahabad High Court in the case observed and has granted bail to an accused who is booked under the UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act wherein the court observed that the prosecution had not demonstrated with cogent evidence that the substance which are recovered was beef or the beef products.
The bench headed by Justice Vikram D. Chauhan in the case observed and has stated that merely possessing or carrying meat cannot amount to the sale or transport of beef or the beef products as the same is punishable under the Slaughter Act unless it is being shown by cogent and sufficient evidence that the substance recovered is beef.
The counsel, Advocate Vishwa Nath Pandey appeared for the applicant-accused.