"Whether You Take Care Of Citizens Like You Care For Cows?: Gujarat High Court Seeks DM's Reply

The Gujarat High Court on Friday asked the District Magistrate, Gir-Somnath as to whether the care which is claimed to have been taken on behalf of the State for gauvansh, similar care is being taken for citizens in the area under his jurisdiction?

The Bench of Justice Paresh Upadhyay was hearing a plea challenging the detention order passed by DM under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 as he alleged tied up cattle in such a way that they could not drink water.

The Bench orally remarked (in Gujarati)

"Protecting cows is alright..but is similar care being taken for children?"

Importantly, the Court had, in its June 28 order, asked the similar question and had sought the reply by July 23, however, since the reply did not come across, the Court again posed the same question and gave DM the time to fill his reply on the question by August 13.

The case against the petitioner was that he was booked for not taking proper care of cow progeny [accused of tying up cattle in such a way that they could not drink water], and later PASA was invoked against him.

Hearing his matter, the Court had noted that the detaining authority had exercised the powers, treating the petitioner as a 'cruel person' within the meaning of Section 2(bbb) of the Act.

"Said two FIRs and other material which is on record is considered by this Court. On conjoint consideration of the material and the arguments of the contesting parties, prima facie, the impugned order is not sustainable," the Court had observed.

Further, the Court gave an opportunity to the detaining authority, to file reply inter alia mentioning therein, whether the care which is claimed to have been taken on behalf of the State for gauvansh in the present case, similar care is being taken for citizens in the area under his jurisdiction.

With this, the execution of the impugned detention order passed by the District Magistrate, Gir-Somnath was suspended until further order.

Calling for the reply, the Court had directed thus:

"If any such reply is filed by the detaining authority before the next date of hearing, that shall also be taken into consideration by this Court while recording the final order. Until that exercise is done, the petitioner needs to be protected. Further execution of the impugned detention order therefore needs to be suspended."

Case title - Aspak Hanifbhai Panja (Patni) Through Anis Hanifbhai Panja (Patni) v. State Of Gujarat

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order