Hilal Ahmad Wani vs State

Case No. – 25 of 14

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

BENCH: Hon’ble Sh. Narinder Kumar J.

DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 17 July 2014

RELEVANT ACTS/SECTIONS:

Section 44 of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972

Section 49 of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (Purchase of captive animal, etc., by a person other than a licensee)

Section 49-B (1) of Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 (Prohibition of dealings in trophies, animal articles, etc., derived from scheduled animals.)

Section 51punishment under 1972 Act (Penalties)

Section 281 of Cr.P.C. (Record of examination of accused)

Section 313 of Cr.P.C. (Power to examine the accused)

Section 360 of Cr.P.C. (Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition)

BACKSTORY

The appealing party confronted preliminary in complaint case no.109/1 initiated by Wildlife Department for the offence under section 44/49 and 49B (1) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972, culpable under section 51 thereof. Vide decried judgment dt.06.06.2014, learned Addl. chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Central, has held him blameworthy of the previously mentioned offences and sentenced him thereunder. The allegation against him was that out of 49 shawls made of Tibetan Antelope (Panthlops Hodgsoni), seized from his ownership on 05.03.2000, 24 of shahtoosh, were kept with the goal of exchange/business, with no grant or permit. Around the same time, Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate sentenced the accused-appellant to undergo SI for one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/−, or in default of instalment of fine to experience SI for 15 days. Feeling wronged by the censured judgment of conviction and request of the sentence, the appeal has been recorded.

So, the Proclamation of the accused was recorded with the consent for the court. In that announcement, he confessed to having claimed and had the previously mentioned shawls and uncovered that the other three people had nothing to do with those shawls.

In the wake of the recording of pre−charge proof on 27.05.2011, charge for the previously mentioned offences for example under Sec.44, 49 and 49B (1) and Sec.51 of the Act was confined against the charged on 27.05.2011. Since the accused argued not blameworthy and asserted preliminary, by the method of post-charge proof Sh. S. Negi, Wildlife Inspector; Sh. V.B. Dasan, Wildlife Inspector; Sh. R.R. Meena, Wildlife Inspector; Sh. Yogesh, Additional Principal Chief Conservator (Forest); Sh.C.P. Sharma, Expert from Wildlife, Forensic Cell, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun and Sh. Premnath Aneja, proprietor of the previously mentioned level were inspected. 

FORENSIC FINDINGS

Sh.C.P. Sharma, Expert from Wildlife, Forensic Cell, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun examined the evidence (shawls) and reported that the shawls made up of Tibetan Antelope (Panthlops Hodgsoni).

JUDGEMENT

The court didn’t find any ground for the release of the accused appealing party on the post-trial process or for tolerance on the purpose of the sentence. However, the amount of fine was reduced from Rs.10,000/− to Rs.5,000/−. Amount of fine has already been deposited before the Trial Court.

The appeal was dismissed, subject to alteration just on the purpose of the sentence of fine. The petitioner was arrested.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *