Supreme Court overturns cattle-transport conviction: no documents is not proof the 32 bullocks were going to slaughter
Police in Chhattisgarh stopped a truck carrying 32 bullocks towards Odisha and arrested its crew and four men in a car driving ahead of it. All six were convicted of transporting cattle for slaughter and sentenced to a year's rigorous imprisonment, though a veterinary doctor found every animal fit for ploughing. On 29 September 2026 the Supreme Court set aside the conviction of one of the car's passengers.
This page records what the cited court records say happened. Findings belong to the court or authority that made them; this register adds none of its own. Names of private individuals are withheld unless a naming gate clears them.
How we verify →Conviction and sentence set aside for the appellant on 29 September 2026. The judgment concerns only the appellant; the other five accused are not shown to have appealed.
What happened
The Supreme Court recorded that the truck was carrying 32 bullocks from Keduwa towards Odisha when a Head Constable detained it on information; the driver and cleaner were arrested, and a Bolero car moving ahead of the truck was detained on the allegation that it was escorting it.
The trial court convicted all six accused under Section 6 and sentenced them to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a Rs 1,000 fine under Section 10; the first appellate court and the High Court in revision upheld the conviction, the High Court reducing the sentence to the period already served.
A veterinary doctor's report and the president of the gaushala that took the animals both said the cattle were fit and good for agricultural use; the seizure witnesses turned hostile and identified none of the accused.
A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran held that nothing beyond the Head Constable's presumption showed the cattle were being taken for slaughter, that the reverse burden in Section 11 applies only once the basic ingredients are proved, and that nothing substantial proved the car was escorting the truck. It set aside the conviction and sentence.
What the Supreme Court held
“The mere fact that the transport was not accompanied by any documents cannot lead to a presumption that the transport was for slaughter.”
2026 INSC 1076, judgment dated 29 September 2026, para 8 — read the full text
Moving cattle, and no one harmed
The offence charged was moving cattle, presumed to be for slaughter. The animals were healthy, no slaughter was alleged, and the conviction stood on a constable's presumption.
What we could not confirm
The judgment does not name the district or give the date of the interception. It does not say what became of the other five accused or the cattle. Names are withheld.