IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
Siddharth Mridul, Golmei Gaiphulshillu Kabui
Vasochan Ragui – Appellant
Versus
Union of India represented by the Secretary Forest and Wildlife Division, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Indira Paryavaran Bhavan, Jorbagh Road, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Siddharth Mridul, CJ.
[1] The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been instituted by a practicing advocate of this Court, statedly in the public interest, and on the basis of articles in the public domain. The petitioner candidly admits that no representation has so far been addressed to the authorities in relation to the omnibus reliefs prayed for in the instant petition.
[2] The petitioner seeks directions for the enforcement and implementation of the provisions in Chapter V-B of the amended Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 , (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which became effective on 1st April, 2023.
[3] It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that Exotic animals were hitherto not covered by the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 , till the amendment to the said Act took effect as above stated on 1st April, 2023. The petitioner would urge that meanwhile, international transfer of Exotic animals was governed by the Treaty known as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITIES) of Wild Fauna and Flora, which has been ratified by India.
[4] The amendment to the said Act, it is asserted aims to implement the prov
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.
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....
Exercise of inherent power under Section 482 CrPC is an exception but not a rule
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,....
Failure to comply with the mandatory time limit for filing a declaration results in government ownership of wildlife animal articles.
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....
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....
Section 35 of the Act provides that for proper care and treatment of animals in respect of which offences under this Act have been committed, such animal can be kept in pinjrapole with a direction th....
The court has the duty to decide the proper custody of property pending trial, including determining the person with a better claim, and can decide who has a better title if there are rival claimants....
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.