DHYAN FOUNDATION THR ITS COORDINATORversusTHE STATE OF GOA THR ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND 9 ORS

2026:BHC-GOA:1733
                                              (1)                         wpcr-314-2026.odt



                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
                      CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.314 OF 2026
                                     AND
                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.867 OF 2026
                                     AND
                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.875 OF 2026
                                      IN
                      CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.314 OF 2026

                        DHYAN FOUNDATION THR. ITS COORDINATOR
                                              VERSU
                THE STATE OF GOA THR. ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND 9 ORS.
                                                 …
               Mr. Harish Pandya with Mr. Harshavardhan Verma, Advocate for
               Petitioner.
               Mr. Pravin Faldessai, Additional Government Advocate for Respondent
               Nos.1 to 7.
               Mr. Siddharth Nunes, Advocate for Respondent Nos.8 and 9.
                                                 …
                                         CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

                RESERVED ON   :24th AUGUST, 2026.
                PRONOUNCED ON :28th AUGUST, 2026.

               FINAL ORDER:-

               1.    The    present    Writ    Petition   takes      exception     to     order

               no.DYC/QPM/MISC/2026/1572             dated    24.07.2026         passed       by

               respondent no.2 Deputy Collector and Sub Divisional Magistrate,

               Quepem, under Section 163 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surksha Sanhita,

               2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNSS, 2023”). The petitioner further

               seeks direction to appoint neutral Court Commissioner or Monitoring

               Committee to inspect Goshala to report on condition of cattle and

               supervise physical inventory of cattle at the site.
                               (2)                          wpcr-314-2026.odt



2.    The petitioner is registered Trust. With formal no objection of

Shri. Satish Hegde, Attorney of Shree Ramnath Damodar Sansthan

Committee, Zambaulim, petitioner had constructed cattle shed in Survey

No.102/I, village Deusa for operating Goshala. According to petitioner,

on 22.07.2026 mob of about 150 persons trespassed into Goshala and

dismantled shed. The Mamlatdar made report to Deputy Collector and

Sub Divisional Magistrate/respondent no.2 about dismantling of shed

labeling same to be illegal.


3.    On 24.07.2026, respondent no.2 passed ex-parte impugned order

under Section 163 of BNSS, 2023 directing petitioner to remove all

cattle from site within period of twelve hours to alternate facility center

after obtaining certification from Veterinary Officer regarding fitness of

cattle for transportation. In alternate, Directorate of Animal Husbandry

and   Veterinary    Services       was   instructed   to   undertake      rescue

transportation and relocation of cattle to the recognized Goshalas at the

risk of petitioner.      The Mamlatdar was directed to supervise

implementation of order. The order is purportedly issued as an urgent

preventive measure to remove imminent danger to public safety, public

health and animal welfare without prejudice to right, title, interest or

possession in respect of Survey No.102/I and criminal proceedings

initiated by respective parties.
                               (3)                       wpcr-314-2026.odt



4.    The present Writ Petition was taken up for hearing by this Court

on 29.07.2026. After hearing learned Advocate appearing for petitioner

and Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State, this Court had

directed petitioner to submit alternate plan to take care of the situation,

(as petitioner had no proper shed at current location) and provide all

possible assistance to State Machinery to shift all cattle from disputed

site to Government authorized Goshala.          On 30.07.2026, it was

submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner’s priority is to shift

cattle to State Government authorized Goshala.         However, shifting

cannot be done immediately and likely to take approximately four

weeks time. Accordingly, this Court had issued directions to Deputy

Collector to assess situation on the ground and shift cattle under

supervision of Veterinary Officer.      The petitioner was directed to

provide necessary assistance to Government Machinery, so as to

smoothly effect shifting of cattle. The Deputy Collector was directed to

submit report to this Court.


5.    Eventually, a report dated 03.08.2026 is filed by Deputy Collector

stating that 108 cattle have been shifted with care and under supervision

of Veterinary Officer and Veterinary workers.         The particulars of

animals, date of shifting and place, where cattle are shifted are

mentioned in report. The communications in this regard are given to

petitioner, Forest Officer and Municipal Council of Quepem.
                               (4)                         wpcr-314-2026.odt



5.    At this stage, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner submitted

that impugned order was passed exceeding jurisdiction vested under

Section 163 of BNSS, 2023. The petitioner was not given copy of

report, which was made foundation for high-handed action directing

petitioner to comply herculean task of removing cattle from disputed

site within short window of twelve hours. The petitioner is not provided

opportunity of inspection of animals, which are shifted at various

places. No consideration was given to petitioner’s representations dated

26.07.2026 and 28.07.2026.


6.    The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that State

Authorities have provided best possible support in interest of safety of

cattle and executed directions given by this Court. The petitioner is

making unfounded allegations against State Machinery, who discharged

its obligation and functions in tune with provisions of law. He fairly

concedes to grant inspection of cattle to petitioner and also to consider

petitioner’s representation for return of cattle shifted under orders of this

Court, if petitioner provides appropriate housing facility.


7.    In light of submissions advanced by learned Advocates appearing

for respective parties and development that took place during pendency

of present petition, this Court finds that challenge to impugned order no

more survives, however, it would be appropriate, if petitioner is

provided with copy of report dated 22.07.2026 made by Mamlatdar of
                                 (5)                       wpcr-314-2026.odt



Quepem on which Deputy Collector acted upon while passing order

impugned in this petition. Similarly, petitioner can be given inspection

of cattle shifted at other facilities under orders of this Court. After

having inspection of cattle and receipt of copy of report dated

22.07.2026, petitioner shall be at liberty to make fresh representation to

respondent no.2 for appropriate action in accordance with law. In case

such representation is made, respondent no.2 shall consider same within

period of four weeks thereafter and communicate his decision to

petitioner. Till such decision is taken, respondent no.2 shall ensure that

cattle are safely housed at the places mentioned in report dated

03.08.2026 submitted to this Court.


8.       With aforesaid directions, Writ Petition stands disposed of.


9.       In view of disposal of Criminal Writ Petition, present applications

also stand disposed of.


                                           (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                                    JUDGE
Devendra/August-2026