SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KRISHNA MURARI, HIMA KOHLI, JJ.
Swetab Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
Ministry Of Environment, Forest & Climate Change And Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 540 Of 2022
Decided On : 08-08-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the legality of the advisory. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. agreement with prior high court decisions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. post-deadline declarations lack exemptions. (Para 5) |
| 4. dismissal of the writ petition. (Para 6) |
ORDER :
1. This petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the notification dated 11.06.2020 issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The said notification was issued in the form of an “advisory for dealing with import of exotic live species of animals and birds in India and declaration of stock”.
2. The same Advisory has been the subject matter of challenge before various High Courts on identical grounds. However, it has been upheld at all junctures. Reference may be made to the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated 23.10.2020 rendered in Khodiyar Animal Welfare Trust & Anr. Vs. Ministry of Environment [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 6372 of 2020]; judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated 14.10.2020 in Vivek Swami Vs. Union of India [D.B. Writ Petition No. 7491 of 2020]; judgment of the Meghalaya High Court dated 14.10.2020 in Miss. J.S.Wahlang Vs. Union of India [PIL No. 15 of 2021]; and the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated 30.07.2020 in Dinesh Chandra Vs. Union of India through Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Others [P.I.L. Civil No. 12032 of 2020].
3. We have gone through the judgments of the High Courts referred to above upholding the Advisory impugned herein and are in agreement with the same. It may be noted that a Special Leave Petition, being SLP (C) No. 11659 of 2020, was filed against the abovementioned judgment of the Allahabad High Court which came to be dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2020.
4. The above judgment of the Allahabad High Court is a complete answer to the present PIL filed by the petitioner. Any interpretation to the contrary as suggested by the petitioner would defeat the very object of the Advisory. Once a declaration within the window of six months as provided under the Advisory is made, the exotic live species, including its progeny, the declarant or transferee(s) are fully exempt from explaining the source of exotic live species. The exotic live species which is declared or its progeny, are not liable to confiscation or seizure by any Central Agency or State Agency. Consequently, the declarant or the transferee(s) of such declarant will be immune from prosecution under any civil, fiscal and criminal statute by any Central or State Agency. Any other interpretation would lead to absurdity.
5. However, any declaration made after the expiry of the window under the Advisory shall carry no such exemption and the declarer shall have to comply with all requisite documentation under the extant laws and regulations.
6. The present Writ Petition stands dismissed with the aforesaid observations.
The court held that possession of undeclared exotic species is not punishable under existing laws, affirming that legislative changes cannot be mandated by judiciary unless there is a violation of fu....
Amendment Act cannot post facto criminalize possession.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the seizure and summon issued to the appellant for the transportation of the Exotic Live Bird were illegal and an abuse of the process of law,....
The declaration under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme serves as sufficient evidence of acquisition for Exotic animals, and subsequent legislation cannot revoke benefits conferred by the Scheme.
Exercise of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC is an exception but not a rule
Point of law: When the goods are recovered from a person who is not proved to be the importer of the goods and claims to be a purchaser of the imported goods, onus is always on the customs authoritie....
Failure to comply with the mandatory time limit for filing a declaration results in government ownership of wildlife animal articles.
The Wildlife (Protection) Act permits trade of certain imports without prior approval if classified under free categories, imposing a requirement for licenses strictly for commercial activities, ensu....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.