Supreme Court: reverse burden under cattle-preservation law applies only after guilt ingredients are first proved

The Supreme Court acquitted a man convicted under the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004 for allegedly transporting 32 bullocks toward Odisha in a truck escorted by a car in which he was travelling. The trial court, the appellate court and the revisional court had all upheld his conviction under Sections 6 and 10 of the Act, which penalise transporting cattle for slaughter. Section 11 of the Act casts a reverse burden on the accused to prove that the transport was not for slaughter, but the Court held this presumption operates only once the prosecution first proves, beyond reasonable doubt, the essential ingredients of the offence — here, that the cattle were being carried for slaughter.

A veterinary doctor and the head of the local Gaushala Committee had both testified that the seized cattle were healthy and fit for ploughing, and there was no evidence the car was actually escorting the truck. The Court found that mere absence of transport documents cannot, by itself, found a presumption of intent to slaughter; any consequence for undocumented transport must flow from the statute governing documentation, not from the cattle-preservation law. The conviction, sentence and revisional order were set aside, and the appeal allowed.