JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 19.01.2018 passed in Criminal Revision No.19 of 2018 by which order dated 02.01.2018, passed on his application under section 451 Cr.P.C. for release of the seized animals has been declined, has been affirmed. 2. Mr. K.S. Nanda, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cattles belonging to the petitioner do not fall under the definition of ''Bovine Animal'' as defined under section 2(b) of the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughtering Act, 2005. 3. The revisional court in its order dated 19.01.2018 has observed that the plea challenging the description of the cattles seized can be decided during the trial. Under sub-section 5 of Section 11 of the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughtering Act, 2005 a restriction has been imposed on release of bovine animals. Two courts have concurrently observed against the petitioner and in this revision petition the petitioner has tried to raise a similar issue which has already been decided by the courts below. Under section 451 Cr.P.C. one of the conditions for custody of the property is that it is subject to speedy and natural decay. 4. In the above facts, keeping in mind the limitations under the revisional jurisdiction [refer " Sheonandan Paswan Vs. State of Bihar & Ors." reported in (1987) 1 SCC 288 ], I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and accordingly, Cr. M.P. No.779 of 2018 is dismissed.