Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(2)ALD63(SC); [2008(2)JCR86(SC)]; JT2008(1)SC364; 2008(2)KLT105(SC); 2008(1)SCALE231; 2008AIRSCW787; 2008(2)ICC175
..... case, an order of confiscation of the vehicle was passed by the competent authority and the confiscation order had attained finality. the present case arises under the wild life protection act and the facts are materially different. 14. the decision of this court closer to the issue under consideration may be found in moti lal v. central ..... the same question arises for consideration. the question is whether a vehicle or vessel etc. seized under section 50(1)(c) of the wild life (protection) act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') is put beyond the power of the magistrate to direct its release during the pendency of trial in exercise of powers under section 451 ..... no substance in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant that section 50 of the wild life act is a complete code and, therefore, cbi would have no jurisdiction to investigate the offences under the said act. hence, it cannot be said that the judgment and order passed by the high court rejecting the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2004IAD(Delhi)132; 107(2003)DLT684
..... fuscus does not require any license and is free from any condition with regard to obtaining any no objection from the wild life authorities under the wild life (protection) act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the said act). learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to section viii, chapter 41 of the itc(hs) classification of export and ..... here also imports are free and no import license is required. however/a condition to the policy is prescribed and that condition is 'imports subject to wild life (protection) act, 1972 and cites'. the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that if the petitioner imported raw hides skin of the very same reptile ..... if the import of tanned skin of caiman crocodilus fuscus is indicated in the policy as 'free', it would still be prohibited by virtue of the wild life (protection) act, 1972. he submitted that the import policy made it clear that insofar as the imports were concerned, no license was required. however, this does not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(2)BomCR485; (1991)93BOMLR432
..... for the authority to complain about the commission of the offences was already vested in the said range forest officer, as an assistant wild life warden under the provisions of wild life (protection) act even before the present complaint came to be filed on 26-4-1961. it is not a contention that the investment of authority ..... authorization to the range forest officer, murtizapur as the complainant in the case, seeking to exercise his power to prosecute under section 35 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, was not indeed there and upto the date of the decision of the said application before the chief judicial magistrate no document establishing due ..... report of the police sub-inspector, murtizapur. the learned magistrate who initially took cognizance of the offence in both the cases, under section 55 of the wild life (protection) act, subsequently held that the petitioners were being duly proceeded against by the p.s.i. the petitioners therefore filed criminal application no. 206/82 in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2000SC975; (2001)2GLR1091; JT2000(2)SC189; 2000(1)SCALE606; (2000)2SCC599; [2000]1SCR907; 2000(2)LC843(SC)
..... the development of the said backward area of kutchh district. the resolution was passed in exercise of the powers conferred by section 26-a(3) of the wild life protection act. pursuant to that resolution the government issued a notification to that effect on 9-8-1995. the petitioner again challenged those notifications by filing the writ petition ..... 14-4 1981 the government of gujarat, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 18(1) of the wild life protection act, 1972, declared a part of the forest area in lakhphat taluka of kutch district as a 'wild life sanctuary.' the total area of the sanctuary was 765.79 sq. k.m. on 27-7-1993 it ..... for exploitation and with this intention and without in any way diluting the commitment to protect wild life and to improve the habitat by positive steps the government is proposing this resolution under the provisions of section 26-a(3) of the wild life (protection) act, 1972. we agree with mr. dhawan that some aspects deserved better consideration and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1994IAD(Delhi)13; 1994(28)DRJ281
..... dated 11.9.1974 the petitioner was found guilty of contravention of the provisions of section 40(2) and 49 of the wild life (protection) act and was convicted under section 51 of the wild life (protection) act and sentenced to undergo r.i. for a period of 1-1/2 years and also to pay a fine of rs. ..... and part ii of schedule ii and also trophies/uncured trophies covered under section 49 of the wild life {protection} act were recovered and for that offence which act was in contravention of section 40(2) and 49 of the wild life (protection) act and on 282 that account this petitioner was charged to face trial under sub-section hi of ..... custody or control of such captive animal, animal article, meat, trophy or uncured trophy. the recovered trophies/uncured trophies are covered under section 49 of the wild life (protection) act. (17) the court below discussed and dealt with the evidence in both the cases separately and found that this petitioner was in conscious possession, custody and control .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1985(1)BomCR47; (1984)86BOMLR347
..... made out, and the plea of guilty must be held to be immaterial in these circumstances.15. i may here only observe that the provisions of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, have been designed to prevent discrimination and commercial exploitation of rare species of animals and reptiles, and prosecutions need to be undertaken and conducted in ..... this complaint came to be numbered as case no. 34/s of 1982. in this complaint the petitioner was charged for having committed various offences under the wild life (protection) act, 1972. the complaint was proceeded with and evidence of respondent no. 1 and one of the panchas came to be recorded. on the basis of this evidence ..... bombay, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for offences under sections 39(3), 40(2), 42, 44(1), 44(2), 49 read with section 51 of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, the petitioner has preferred the present revision.2. it is the prosecution case that the petitioner carries on business in the firm name and style of ' .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2002SC1691; 2002(2)BLJR1123; (SCSuppl)2002(3)CHN112; 2002CriLJ2060; 2002(2)Crimes193(SC); JT2002(4)SC31; 2002(3)SCALE435; (2002)4SCC713; [2002]2SCR995; 2002(1)LC694(SC);
..... is whether the central bureau of investigation (cbi) was authorised to investigatean offence, which is punishable under the wild life (protection) act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the wild life act') as is contendedthat the said act is a self contained code? before deciding the said question we would narrate brief facts of the case. 3 ..... investigate the matter is without any substance. 8. keeping the aforesaid notifications in mind, we would firstrefer to the relevant provisions of the wild life act. it is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that section 50prescribes exhaustive procedure to investigate and seize the articles specified therein. ..... this appeal. 5. at the time of hearing of this matter, mr. d.n, goburdhan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the wild life act is a special law as understood under section 5 of the code ofcriminal procedure, 1973 and it contains comprehensive provisions for investigation, inquiry, search, seizure, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2008(1)ALLMR497
..... found transporting forest produce and therefore was seized by the officers of the respondents under the provisions of the said act, as well as the provisions of the wild life (protection) act, 1972, hereinafter called as 'the wild life act'. the forest produce involved in the matter are chips of shrubs known as 'mappia foetida' which is popularly ..... that the product transported by the petitioners in the petitioners vehicle was not forest produce. secondly that there is no notice issued under the provisions of wild life (protection) act, 1972, and therefore, the seizure/forfeiture is illegal. and thirdly that the petitioners, as common carrier, are not expected to know the contents ..... so also is the duty of every citizen in the country, in terms of article 51a of the constitution to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life. taking into consideration the prevailing situation in the country, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(2)ALD802; 1998(3)ALT215
..... g.o.ms. no.76 environment, forest, science and technology (forest iii) department, dated 25-9-1995 under section 18 of the wild life protection act (for short 'the act') and whether the petitioners could be prohibited from carrying on pisciculture in the lands owned or occupied by them till final notification under section 26a ..... pradesh with effect from 5-8-1973. the prime object of the enactment is for the protection of wild animals and birds and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental ..... the preliminary notification was already issued under section 18 of the act. therefore, by virtue of the interim orders the petitioners who are pattedars of the lands are being permitted to continue their fishing operations.5. the parliament enacted the wild life (protection) act, 1972, which came into force in the state of andhra .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1998(3)ALD111; 1998(2)ALT380
..... the respondent to regulate entry into the park. the second writ petition has been filed against the notification dated 19-3-1994 made under section 35 of the wild life protection act intending to declare the area as a national park. another writ petition no. 117040/97 was also filed for the direction to the respondent to withdraw the ..... only to keep it as a 'lung space' for the city, that the object of the wild life protection act was only to preserve animals which is inconsistent with maintenance of large park inside the city and there are really no wild animals in that area, that generally national parks which form large areas of a minimum 50,000 ..... of a public property, has a right to regulate the entry for protection of that public property. he submitted that the recent restrictions were intended only to protect and conserve the area and docs not amount to any harassment.5. the perusal of the wild life protection act shows that the government has been enabled to declare any area as a .....
Tag this Judgment!