Guwahati: The Supreme Court on Friday puled up the Assam government for focusing on meat transporters instead of more productive work.
A bench of Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan questioned the state’s priorities while granting interim relief to a transporter charged with transporting packaged raw meat, Bar and Bench reported.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
“The State should have better things to do than running after these people,” the bench remarked.
The top court stayed the criminal proceedings against the transporter and scheduled the next hearing for April 16.
The judges also pointed out the difficulty of visually distinguishing packaged raw meat from different animals.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
“How a person will know only if there is meat, that it is meat of beef. By seeing with naked eyes, person will not know,” the court observed.
The accused, a warehouse owner, clarified that he only transported the packaged meat and was not involved in its packing or production.
While the state claimed the accused was also selling the meat, the court noted that this, prima facie, wouldn’t necessarily constitute an offense under Section 8 of the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, which prohibits selling beef without authorization.
The court emphasized that “knowledge” of the meat being beef is a crucial aspect of the provision. “In section 8 it was packed items. He has not packed it. Warehouse is there, but the good which are there, he is not the manufacturer. He has not packed it,” the court stated.
Even if the meat was packaged, the judges stressed that the accused’s knowledge that it was beef must be established.
The court cited a similar case in the Bombay High Court where “knowledge” was deemed a necessary element under the section.
They further questioned how anyone could visually identify the animal origin of raw meat. When the state’s counsel mentioned the meat was intercepted at a checkpoint and sent for forensic testing after the driver couldn’t identify it, Justice Oka responded,
“That’s what we are saying! Common man can’t understand. Proof of the pudding is in eating,” Justice Bhuyan added.
Following this exchange, the court formally stayed the criminal proceedings.