https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275465 A panjarapole has locus standi to seek interim custody of animals seized in cruelty-related proceedings because the statutory scheme recognises its animal-welfare role. Section 35 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act does not create a universal rule that seized animals must be handed to a panjarapole; interim custody depends on the facts, the condition of the animals, and the need to prevent further cruelty. Maintenance costs are not generally recoverable from the owner or accused merely because custody is given to the State or panjarapole. Police seizure is not invalid simply because the offence is non-cognizable, and interim custody must be decided case by case under judicial discretion guided by animal welfare. en-us Tue, 08 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Oct 2018 12:41:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275465 A panjarapole has locus standi to seek interim custody of animals seized in cruelty-related proceedings because the statutory scheme recognises its animal-welfare role. Section 35 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act does not create a universal rule that seized animals must be handed to a panjarapole; interim custody depends on the facts, the condition of the animals, and the need to prevent further cruelty. Maintenance costs are not generally recoverable from the owner or accused merely because custody is given to the State or panjarapole. Police seizure is not invalid simply because the offence is non-cognizable, and interim custody must be decided case by case under judicial discretion guided by animal welfare. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275465