A month after the Allahabad Excessive Courtroom pulled up the Sitapur Police over a case registered underneath the UP Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act in February, the police have submitted a last report within the matter in a neighborhood courtroom and closed the case.
At a listening to on Might 17, the courtroom had noticed that provisions of the Act had been wrongly invoked in opposition to 22-year-old Suraj, the applicant. The courtroom gave the police two weeks to file a reply. It additionally granted bail to Suraj, who had been booked underneath sections three and eight of the Act on February 25 together with three others — Ibrahim, Aneesh and Shahzad. Suraj had been in jail for the reason that registration of the case.
A police officer in Sitapur advised The Indian Express Friday that after the Excessive Courtroom’s observations, a contemporary probe discovered “no proof in opposition to the accused”. Because of this, the case was closed, and a last report was submitted to a neighborhood courtroom.
“The ultimate report was submitted in a neighborhood courtroom after a path got here from the Allahabad Excessive Courtroom. In its order, the Excessive Courtroom raised some points with the case, and subsequently, the case was closed and a last report was filed in a neighborhood courtroom,” he added.
Superintendent of Police (SP) Rakesh Prakash Singh refused to touch upon the case “because it was pending in courtroom”.
Throughout a listening to on Wednesday, the Further Authorities Advocate (AGA) submitted he would file the report in compliance with the Might 17 order inside a day. The courtroom granted Suraj’s counsel Dileep Kumar Yadav per week to reply to the AGA’s report. The case has been listed for listening to on June 24.
On February 25, the FIR in opposition to the 4 accused was registered primarily based on a police criticism alleging that considered one of its groups had overheard a dialog between the accused about slaughtering three calves. In accordance with the FIR, primarily based on a tip, the police workforce had “rigorously crept as much as the aforesaid individuals and had heard them speaking with one another within the bushes that they’d slaughtered three calves and have obtained enormous sum of money and that now they had been having two bulls of their possession and deliberate to slaughter them too”.
After perusing the FIR, the courtroom mentioned, “It clearly comes out that neither the bulls which had been present in possession of the applicant had been slaughtered nor had been maimed or had any bodily damage”.
On Might 17, the courtroom mentioned it might have “parted with the case” after granting bail however it “finds it within the curiosity of justice to direct the Superintendent of Police, Sitapur, to file his private affidavit” relating to “the averments made within the bail software in addition to indicating as to how the cognizance of Sections three and eight of the Act, 1955 have been invoked in opposition to the applicant”.
The courtroom additionally noticed that the applicant was in jail for greater than two-and-a-half months primarily based on the sections invoked in opposition to him which “would prima facie not be attracted within the mentioned incident”.