JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal leave to appeal is directed against judgment of 12.08.08 learned Additional District Judge (FT) Balotra in Sessions Case No. 114/05. By the judgment, respondent Makhan Khan is acquitted of the charged offence of Section 3/8 Rajasthan Bovine Animal (Prohibition of Slaughter & Regulation of Temporary Migration or Export) Act, 1995. 2. Heard learned Public Prosecutor. 3. Brief necessary facts are that on 13.08.85 at 6:15 evening, one Marakh Khan accompanied with brother Yusuf Khan lodged a written report stating that on that day in morning, his cow out for grazing reached near agricultural field of respondent Makhan Khan he inflicted blows of lathi to the cow resulting in bleeding by nose and severe injuries - Tayab and Yusuf told appellant not to do so but he continued beating telling that why the cow is left grazing there. Further stated that when owner of the cow arrived there, he came to know of the incident and cow having died after 2:30 PM is lying near house of complainant. In course of investigation, postmortem was also conducted and a lathi recovered on the information of the respondent. 4. Among the prosecution witnesses, Marakh Khan PW/2 is the complainant, Yusuf Khan PW/3 is witness named in FIR and Mubarak PW/11 said to be other witness of the incident. PW/2 and PW/11 are declared hostile. PW/13 is the doctor who proved postmortem report and PW/12 is the I.O.SHO. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor argued that though the complainant is declared hostile but named eye-witness in FIR PW/3 very categorically states that respondent did beat the cow and continued to do so despite his asking to not to do so and the injuries caused resulted in death which stands proved by the postmortem. 6. Considered arguments and produced evidence. From the evidence of witnesses and Veterinary doctor is proved that cow died on that day due to beating by hard object. A perusal of FIR discloses and also appear from the evidence of complainant PW/2 that the complainant himself did not witness the incident. The complainant PW/2 is declared hostile who further says that accused did not do any such act. A perusal of FIR discloses and also appear from the evidence of complainant PW/2 that the complainant himself did not witness the incident. The complainant PW/2 is declared hostile who further says that accused did not do any such act. Yusuf S/o Sale Khan though states that respondent inflicted several blows to cow but learned Trial Judge has observed in the judgment that there is no reason to assume his presence there, particularly when from other evidence or site inspection memo, his any agricultural field in that area do not appear to be. Other eye-witness named in the FIR is not produced by the prosecution. PW/11 Mubarak or any other witness do not pertain to looking of incident and neither of them have said so. For these reasons and also for other reasons mentioned in the judgment, the findings cannot be said to be contrary to the evidence or not based on reasonably strong basis. 7. For the above reasons, no case for grant of leave to appeal is made out. The leave to appeal having no force is rejected.Leave to appeal dismissed. *******