A month after the Allahabad High Court pulled up the Sitapur police over a case registered underneath the UP Cow Slaughter Act in February, the police submitted a last report within the matter to a neighborhood courtroom and closed the case.
In a listening to on May 17, the courtroom had discovered that the provisions of the Act have been wrongly invoked in opposition to the applicant, 22-year-old Suraj. The courtroom gave the police two weeks to file its reply. It additionally granted bail to Suraj, who was booked on February 25 underneath sections 3 and eight of the Act together with three others – Ibrahim, Anish and Shehzad. Suraj was in jail because the case was registered.
A police officer in Sitapur instructed The Indian Express on Friday that following the High Court’s observations, a recent investigation discovered “no evidence against the accused”. As a outcome, the case was closed, and a last report was submitted to a neighborhood courtroom.
“The final report was submitted to a local court after a direction came from the Allahabad High Court. In its order, the High Court took up certain issues with the matter, and later, the matter was closed and a final report was filed in a local court,” he mentioned.
Superintendent of Police (SP) Rakesh Prakash Singh declined to touch upon the matter as “it was pending in the court”.
During a listening to on Wednesday, the Additional Government Advocate (AGA) submitted that he would file a report in compliance with the May 17 order inside a day. The courtroom gave per week’s time to Sooraj’s lawyer Dilip Kumar Yadav to answer the AGA report. The matter has been listed for listening to on June 24.
On February 25, an FIR was registered in opposition to the 4 accused on the premise of a police criticism alleging that considered one of their groups had overheard a dialog between the accused about killing three calves. According to the FIR, primarily based on a tip-off, the police workforce “carefully apprehended the above persons and heard them talking among themselves in the bushes that they had killed three calves and had received huge amount of money”. And now they’d two bulls of their possession and deliberate to kill them too.
After perusing the FIR, the courtroom mentioned, “It clearly emerges that the bulls found in the possession of the applicant were neither slaughtered nor maimed or had suffered any bodily injury.”
On 17 May, the courtroom mentioned that she “dissociated from the case” after granting bail however “it is in the interest of justice that she be directed to the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur to file her personal affidavit”. Give directions in regards to the statements. Along with the bail utility it additionally signifies how cognizance of Sections 3 and eight of the Act, 1955 has been taken in opposition to the applicant.
The courtroom additionally noticed that the applicant remained in jail for greater than two and a half months by advantage of the sections framed in opposition to him which “would not be prima facie attracted in the said incident”.
.
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
