On Friday, the Gujarat High Court asked Gir-Somnath, the district magistrate, if the assertion that the state is looking after citizens in similar jurisdictions is true?
Justice Paresh Upadhyay’s division bench was hearing a petition challenging the District Magistrate’s decriminalization order under the Gujarat Prevention of Social Activities Act, 1985, since he allegedly tied up the animals in such a way that they couldn’t obtain water.
Importantly, the court asked the same question in its order of July 28 and requested a response by July 23. When the response did not arrive, the court raised the same question again and instructed the District Magistrate to provide his response by August 13th.
The evidence against the petitioner was that they were arrested for tying cow progeny [to the point where they couldn’t drink water], and the dice were then used against them.
The court had noted during its hearing that the attending authority had used its powers to treat the petitioner as a “cruel person” under section 2 (bbb) of the Act.
Furthermore, the court provided the claimant with the chance to mention in Uttar Pradesh, if the Gauvans in this instance were taken on behalf of the State, to react to the reply, and other similar rights. Citizens in the zone are treated with the same care as those in the surrounding communities.
With this, the District Magistrate of Gir-impugned Somnath’s custody order was put on hold till further orders.
Lawcutor 