( 1 ) WHETHER a person who, after fastening the legs and mouth of a cow by rope makes it lie on the floor of his courtyard, sits on its neck with a knife of 38 centimeters blade in his hand (and the other person hold its tail) and after reading Kalma about to slaughter it, comes within the mischief of Sections 3 and 8 of the U. P. Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is the question which requires our answer in this writ petition. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has come up with a prayer to quash the First Information Report dated 20-11-2001 giving rise to registration of Case Crime No. 266 of 2001 P. S. Behat, District Saharanpur under Sections 3/5/8 of the Act as contained in Annexure-1. ( 3 ) A perusal of the impugned First Information Report shows, inter alia, to this effect:- It has been lodged by Sub Inspector Jagveer Singh Tomar of P. S. Behat, District Saharanpur, who was informed by Mukhbir in regard to slaughter of a cow by the petitioner in his house, he rushed to his house and saw through the holes of the door, which was closed from inside, a black cow whose mouth and four legs were tied by ropes lying on the courtyard and the petitioner armed with a knife having a blade of 38 centimeter in his right hand sitting on its neck and the co-accused Shahzad Son of Ayub alias Mamdu Quraishi was found holding its tale from behind, he heard of his saying to the Petitioner that much meat will be found and to read out Kalma quickly and thus he was convinced that in fact they wanted to slaughter the cow, he thereafter repeatedly pushed the door, opened it and entered the house as a result of which both accused fled away after leaving out the knife. ( 4 ) SRI Ashfaq Ahmad Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that mere preparation to slaughter a cow is no offence under Sections 3/5/8 of the Act. To support it he relied on a decision of a learned Single Judge in Parasram Ji v. Imtiaz AIR 1962 Allahabad 22. ( 4 ) SRI Ashfaq Ahmad Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that mere preparation to slaughter a cow is no offence under Sections 3/5/8 of the Act. To support it he relied on a decision of a learned Single Judge in Parasram Ji v. Imtiaz AIR 1962 Allahabad 22. ( 5 ) THE statement of objects and reasons for the enactment of the Act in question, as published in U. P. Gazette Extraordinary, 30/03/1955, reads as follows:-"article 48 of the Constitution of India enjoins on the State Government to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and in particular to take steps for preserving and improving the breeds and prohibiting the slaughter of cow and its progeny. All efforts to protect the cow in the past including even the war-time legislative measures banning slaughter of certain categories of useful stock, have not brought about any satisfactory results. In view of this experience and the consideration that the cow and its progeny must be saved with a view to provide milk, bullock power as well as manure, it become imperative to impose a complete ban on cow slaughter. " ( 6 ) THE Preamble of the Act also shows that it was enacted to prohibit and prevent slaughter of cows and its progency. The heading of Section 3 also itself talks of prohibition of Cow Slaughter. ( 7 ) THE relevant extract of Sections 3, 5 and 8 of the authoritative English text of the Act read as follows:-"3. Prohibition of Cow slaughter - (1) Except as hereinafter provided, no person shall slaughter or cause to be slaughtered, or offer or cause to be offered for slaughter - (a) a cow, (b) a bull or bullock, unless he has obtained in respect thereof a certificate in writing, from the competent authority of the area in which the bull or bullock is to be slaughtered, certifying that it is fit for slaughter, in any place in Uttar Pradesh, anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or an usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding. (2) No bull or bullock, in respect of which a certificate has been issued under sub-section (2) (b) shall be slaughtered at any place other than the place indicated in the certificate. (2) No bull or bullock, in respect of which a certificate has been issued under sub-section (2) (b) shall be slaughtered at any place other than the place indicated in the certificate. (3) A certificate under sub-section (1) (b) shall be issued by the competent authority, only after it has, for reasons to be recorded in writing, certified that - (a) the bull or bullock is over the age of fifteen years, or (b) in the case of a bull, it has become permanently unfit and unserviceable for the purpose of breeding and, in the case of a bullock, it has become permanently unfit and unserviceable for the purpose of drought and any kind of agricultural operation: provided that the permanent unfitness or unserviceability has not been caused deliberately. (4) The competent authority; shall, before issuing the certificate under sub-section (3) or refusing to issue the same, record its order in writing. (5) The State Government may, at any time, for the purposes of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of the action taken under this section, call for and examine the record of any case and may pass such orders thereon as it may deem fit. (6) Subject to the provisions herein contained, any action taken under this section, shall be final and conclusive and shall not be called in question. "5. Prohibition on sale of beef - Except as herein excepted and notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, no person shall sell or transport or offer for sale or transport or cause to be sold or transported beef or beef-products in any form except for such medicinal purposes as may be prescribed. Exception - A person may sell and serve or cause to be sold and served beef or beef-products for consumption by a bona fide passenger in an aircraft or railway train. ( 8 ) PENALTY - (1) Whoever contravenes or attempts to contravene or abets the contravention of the provisions of Section 3 or 5 shall be guilty of an offence punishable with rigorious imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both. ( 8 ) PENALTY - (1) Whoever contravenes or attempts to contravene or abets the contravention of the provisions of Section 3 or 5 shall be guilty of an offence punishable with rigorious imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees or with both. (2) Whoever fails to lodge the information in the manner and within the time stated in sub-section (2) of section 4 or contravenes the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 5-A shall be guilty of an offence punishable with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees or with both. (3) In any trial for an offence punishable under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) the burden of proving that the slaughtered cow belonged to the class specified in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 4 shall be on the accused. " (Emphasis supplied)7. 1 The Act in question was passed in Hindi and captioned as "uttar Pradesh Govadh Niwaran Adhiniyam, 1955, Sections 3, 5 and 8 of which read as follows:- ( 9 ) A bare perusal of the Objects and Reasons, the Preamble and Section 3 aforementioned leaves no manner of doubt that except as provided under the Act itself no person shall slaughter or cause to be slaughtered, or offer or cause to be offered for slaughter a cow. Section 8 (1) of the Act gets attracted even if one attempts to contravene or violate the provisions of Sections 3 and 5 of the Act. Further it gets attracted in cases of abetment of the contravention of the provisions as contained in Sections 3 and 5. Sections 3 and 8 are very wide in regard to their applicability. For attracting the provisions of Section 3 of the Act actual slaughter of the cow or inflicting of an injury on it is not must. The Act is a complete Code in itself and reference to the provisions of the Indian Penal Code or general law will not be relevant as the settled law is that special legislation excludes general legislation. ( 10 ) ON the accusations made it is crystal clear to us that the petitioner comes within the ambit of Sections 3 and 8 of the Act. ( 10 ) ON the accusations made it is crystal clear to us that the petitioner comes within the ambit of Sections 3 and 8 of the Act. ( 11 ) UNFORTUNATELY we do not find any specific reference of the Objects and Reasons, the Preamble, Sections 3 and 8 of the Act in the decision relied upon by Mr. Ansari. What we find that the learned Single Judge had placed reliance on illustration (c) to Section 307 I. P. C. and Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code which in view of specific provisions of Section 3 of the Act were not relevant. Even otherwise also as laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in State of M. P. v. Narayan Singh AIR 1989 SC 1789 at 1793 it was observed to the effect that in commission of an offence there are four stages viz. intention, preparation, attempt and execution though the first two stages would not attract culpability but the third and fourth stages would certainly attract culpability. In the instant case tieing of legs and mouth of the cow by rope, catching its tail, flattening it on earth, sitting on its neck, reading of the Kalma with a knife of 28 Cms blade all taken together proceeds to the third stage. This decision by a learned Single Judge is also not binding on our Division Bench. ( 12 ) FOR the reasons aforementioned this writ petition is dismissed summarily but without cost. ( 13 ) BEFORE parting it is clarified that the prosecution is, however, required to prove the relevant facts to the satisfaction of the trial Court. ( 14 ) THE office is directed to hand over a copy of this order to Sri A. K. Sand, learned A. G. A. , within two weeks for its intimation to the authority concerned.