False Cow Slaughter Case | Gujarat Court Acquits Two, Orders Criminal Action Against Cops, 'Gau Rakshak'

A Sessions Court in Gujarat's Panchmahal district (Godhra) on Tuesday directed the lodging of a criminal complaint under Section 248 BNS Act (False charge of offence made with intent to injure) against three state police officials as well as two panch witnesses (one of them being a Gau Rakshak) for filing a 'false' Cow Slaughter case against two men accusing them of transporting cattle for purposes of cow slaughter. Acquitting the two accused in the July 2020 case under the Gujarat Animal Preservation Act 2017 and Animal Cruelty Act 1860, the Additional Sessions Judge Parvezahemad Malaviya observed that the complaint filed against them was entirely false, which resulted in the wrongful detention of the accused for nearly 10 days in judicial custody. “So it is proved that a totally false complaint was given against the accused persons by the complainant, the panchas who are gaurakshaks, have abated in said false prosecution by remaining as panchas, the other police official has also corroborated in said act and finally the investigating officer was required to investigate the crime in proper and judicious manner, but he has not done so and has submitted the chargesheet against the accused persons for the ffences, which was not committed by them nor was made out", the court noted in its 67-page order.”A #GujaratCourt on Tuesday directed for lodging of a criminal complaint against three cops as well as two witnesses (Gau Rakshaks) for filing a 'false' Cow Slaughter case against two men accusing them of transporting cattle for purposes of cow slaughter. pic.twitter.com/HFTlTM2H0b— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) December 5, 2024 The Court noted that the accused persons (Nazirmiya Safimiya Malek and Illyas Mohamad Daval) were also entitled to compensation, and hence, they were at liberty to carry out separate proceedings for compensation against the State, erring police officials, and panch witnesses. In addition to the criminal complaint, the court ordered the Superintendent of Police in Panchmahals, Godhra, to launch departmental proceedings against the officers (Assistant Head Constables Rameshbhai Narvatsinh Bariya and Sankarsinh Sajjansinh Pargi; Police Sub-inspector MS Munia) involved and to update the court about the actions taken against them. The case in brief On July 31, 2020, police officials from a police station in Godhra stopped a speeding vehicle and found a cow, buffalo, and buffalo calf tied inside, without food or water. The driver (Accused no. 1/Malek), and the other person in the vehicle (accused no. 2/Davla) were questioned about the purpose of carrying cattle. As they could not provide satisfactory answers or any documentation for transporting the animals, they were deemed to have been transported for slaughter, and the vehicle was seized. The police registered a case against both accused under Sections 6(A)(1), 8(4) and 10 of the 2017 Act, under Sections 11(1) (d)(e)(f)(h) of 1860 Act, under Section 279 of IPC, under Sections 177, 184 of the Motor Vehicle Act and under Section 119 of the Gujarat Police Act. It was alleged. During the trial, the court noted that the evidence of the Panch Witnesses (Gau Rakshaks), who were not local inhabitants and had been called by the police from their home 8-10 km away, was not credible and genuine. The Court observed that in his cross-examination, one of the panch witnesses admitted to being involved as panch in multiple cases lodged under the Animal Preservation Act and acknowledged that, as a "gau rakshak," he was regularly called to act as a panch. The Court said this admission casts significant doubt on the witness's credibility and the genuineness of his role in the case. “Looking to this fact it can be said that the said panch witness is a stock witness. The word stock means something which is stored or kept in for future use as per the availability. The Stock witness is a person who remains at the back foot of police and comes in front as per directions of police. Their testimony in not very reliable, and the Court always opt not to stand on his testimony,” the Court remarked. The Court further noted that in his cross-examination, the Complainant (Assistant Head Constable Bariya) admitted the cow was likely being transported for milk, which contradicted the prosecution's claim that the animals were being transported for slaughter. The Court further noted that even in the evidence of the second police official (Police Sub-inspector Pargi), it had not been deposed that the animals were transported for slaughter. In fact, he even admitted that he himself has been a complainant in many cases involving animals, and the panchas herein are also panchas in many cases related to animals. Perusing the cross-examination of the investigating officer (Muniya), he had not made any genuine effort to investigate the case properly and did not investigate the...

False Cow Slaughter Case | Gujarat Court Acquits Two, Orders Criminal Action Against Cops, 'Gau Rakshak'

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags