SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SUDHANSHU DHULIA, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, JJ
Rajesh Etc. – Appellants
A1: Rajesh in Criminal Appeal No. 2617 of 2025 @ SLP (Crl.) No.4651 of 2024)
A1: Makbool Ahmed in Criminal Appeal No. 2616 of 2025 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 4650 of 2024)
Versus
Union of India Etc. – Respondents
R1: Union of India in Criminal Appeal No. 2616 of 2025 @ SLP (Crl.) No.4651 of 2024)
R1: State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No. 2616 of 2025 @ SLP (Crl.) No. 4650 of 2024)
Criminal Appeal Nos. OF 2025 [@ Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Nos.4650-4651 of 2024]
Decided On : 15-05-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis of illegal wildlife trade case (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. appellants' argument questioning cbi's evidence (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. court's analysis of investigation and evidence (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. modification of sentence for the appellants (Para 24) |
| 5. final order and conclusion of the appeals (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT
AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.
Leave granted.
2. The present appeals assail the Final Judgment and Order dated 06.06.2023 in Criminal Revision Application Nos.82 and 83 of 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Judgment’) passed by a learned Single Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘High Court’), whereby the revision petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed and Judgment dated 23.05.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-3, Nagpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Sessions Court’) in Criminal Appeal Nos.88 and 97 of 2007 was upheld.
FACTS:
3. Secret information was received by the Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Investigation Unit No.II, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CBI’) that appellant-Makbool Ahmed [appellant in the appeal arising from SLP (Criminal) No.4651/2024, hereinafter referred to as ‘Accused No.1’] and Rajesh [appellant in the appeal arising from SLP (Criminal) No.4650/2024, hereinafter referred to as ‘Accused No.2’] were indulging in illegal trade of tiger skin and wild animal products. The information was to the effect that the appellants were likely to deliver huge quantity of the illegal skin and products to some unknown persons in Nagpur, Maharashtra in the 3rd week of March, 2001. Based on this information, a CBI team, headed by PW4/Mr. A. K. Bassi, Inspector, reached Nagpur and maintained regular contacts with the source. On 21.03.2001, the source informed the CBI team that both accused were likely to deliver huge quantity of tiger skin and wild animal products to some unknown person(s) at about 16:40 hours at M.H.S.K. Mohammad Ali Petrol Pump, Kamptee Road, Nagpur in a Maruti-make car. Accordingly, two independent witnesses were requisitioned by way of a written request by PW4 to the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), CGO Complex, Nagpur and Executive, Patent Information System, CGO Complex, Nagpur, seeking two officers. The Regional Labour Commissioner made available the services of Mr. K.G. Sadawarte and Mr. Umesh Bhosale/PW2, respectively.
4. On even date, PW4, Inspector Jagdish Prasad/PW6 and other staff gathered in the local CBI office, where PW4 briefed Mr. Sadawarte and PW2 about the secret information, and all left for the spot at about 14:45 hours. They reached near the M.H.S.K. Mohammad Ali Petrol Pump at about 15:15 hours. Around 16:30 hours, the source contacted PW4 and pointed to a silver-coloured Maruti Esteem car bearing Registration No.MH-18/C-833 parked in the premises of M.H.K.S. Petrol Pump and informed that the accused were sitting in the car. Immediately, PW4, the CBI staff and the independent witnesses intercepted the said Maruti Esteem car and disclosed their identity to the suspects. In the meantime, a congregation of people had gathered on the spot. PW4 requested one amongst the general public to act as a panch to the proceeding. The Manager of the Petrol Pump named Mr. Rambabu Mangruji Kuthe/PW1 offered to act as a witness. On inquiry, the respective accused disclosed their identities. During the search, it was found that Accused No.1 was sitting on the driver seat of the car and one tiger skin was kept on the front seat of the car, while Accused No.2 was sitting in the rear seat of the car in possession of antler horns, 10 claws and 3 teeth appearing to be of a tiger. When they opened the dicky of the car, they also found gunny bags containing 23 kg of tiger bones, 5 tiger skulls weighing about 2.4 kg and antler horns weighing 1.9 kg. The tiger skin and the wildlife artic
Conviction for illegal wildlife trade upheld; sentence reduced reflecting appellants' youth, emphasizing rigorous evidential standards in wildlife protection cases.
The judgment emphasizes the sufficiency and reliability of evidence in upholding the conviction and sentence for the illegal trade of wild animal products, and highlights the importance of deterrent ....
The prosecution must prove unauthorized entry and destruction of wildlife habitat beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under the Wildlife (Protection) Act.
Unrebutted evidence collected by prosecution appears to be quite enough for holding accused guilty under Section 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, and for that both Courts below have been fully justifi....
Appellate courts cannot order retrial solely to enable prosecution to remedy deficiencies their case.
Section 62(C) of Karnataka Forest Act reads as certificate of Forest Officer to be an evidence.
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.