Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
S.C. Das, J.
Nani Gopal Das - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. Rev. P. No. 83 of 2006Decided On : 31-10-2014
Wildlife Protection Act - Illegal Search and Seizure - Section 9, 27, 29, 51, 55, 57
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the search and seizure of wildlife materials from the accused's house, leading to their conviction under the Wildlife Protection Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the search warrant was not proved, and the complainant was not authorized to file the complaint, leading to the vitiation of the entire trial.
Issues: The key issues were the legality of the search and seizure, the authority of the complainant to file the complaint, and the applicability of the presumption against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the search and seizure, although not entirely legal, could not be termed as without jurisdiction. However, the complaint filed by an unauthorized person vitiated the trial.
Final Decision: The revisional application was allowed, setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, and the accused petitioners were set at liberty.
JUDGMENT
S.C. Das, J.1. No representation on behalf of the petitioners. Learned P.P. is present for the State-respondent.
2. The revisional application was filed in the year 2006 and it is so long pending for hearing. On the last occasion i.e. 01.08.2014 also there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners and so learned counsel Mr. S.S. Debnath who was present in the Court was engaged as a Legal Aid counsel to conduct the case on behalf of the petitioners but today even after repeated call neither the engaged counsel of the petitioners is present nor the learned Legal Aid Counsel is also present. So the engagement of learned Legal Aid Counsel, Mr. S.S. Debnath stands cancelled.
3. Since the revisional application is pending from the year 2006, I think it should be disposed of on merit even in the absence of learned counsel of the petitioners.
4. Heard learned P.P. for the State-respondent.
5. The revisional application is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.07.2006 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Belonia in Criminal Appeal No. 6(2) of 2006 where-under the learned Addl. Sessions Judge affirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 23.05.2006, passed by learned SDJM, Belonia in Case No. CR 429 of 2005(F).
6. Prosecution case is that on the strength of a search warrant issued by Wild Life Warden of Trishna Wild Life Sanctuary, P.W.5 Sri Chandan Kumar Bardhan, Assistant Wild Life Warden of Rangamura Wild Life Range under Trishna Wild Life Sanctuary along with P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 and in presence of P.W.4 made a search in the house of the accused persons at village Goutam Nagar (Rajnagar) under P.S. P.R. Bari and recovered from the house and house premises of the accused persons two numbers of trapping nets of catching wild animals, a skin of barking deer, Stomach and stomach materials of a barking deer, hooves of barking deer, skin, skull, hair etc. of barking deer and dressed meat of barking deer of about 12 Kgs. Meat was kept concealed in a ring well inside a polythene bag. Stomach, stomach materials, hooves etc. were recovered which was put under the earth from the house premises of the accused persons. At the time of search the accused persons fled away from their house and search was made in presence of Smt. Jogamaya Das, wife of the accused petitioner Nani Gopal Das and another Subrata Das, a relative of accused petitioner Nani Gopal Das. After recovery of those materials, Sri Chandan Kumar Bardhan, Assistant Wild Life Warden prepared a seizure list in presence of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 4 and also in presence of Jogamaya Das and took all those materials in custody. The stomach and stomach materials etc. of the barking deer were sent to Sepahijala Wild Life Sanctuary for postmortem examination and PW.6, Dr. Santosh Bhowmik after examination of those seized materials reported that it was of a barking deer. On 25.04.2005, P.W.5, the Assistant Wild Life Warden lodged the complaint before the learned SDJM, Belonia alleging violation of Section 9, 27, 29 of Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 which is an offence punishable under Section 51 of the Said Act.
7. Cognizance was taken on the basis of that complaint and in course of trial, accused persons were examined under Section 251 of Cr.P.C. to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
8. Prosecution examined 6 (six) witnesses to prove the case. P.W.5 is the complainant of the case who conducted search and seizure of meat and body remains of barking deer. P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 were the companion staff of P.W.5. P.W.4 is a resident of that locality and was working as a labourer at the relevant point of time.
9. After closure of the prosecution evidence accused persons were examined under Section 313, Cr.P.C. and thereafter in their turn, they adduced no defence evidence.
Defence case is nothing but denial of the prosecution case.
10. Learned SDJM considering the evidence on record found the accused petitioners guilty of committing offence punishable
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
