SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 1222

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
MA Chowdhary, J
Arjun Balraj Mehta – Appellant
Versus
UT of Ladakh – Respondent
CrlM No. 248/2021 | CrlM No. 2231/2021



Advocates:
For the Appellant: Mr. Ankur Sharma
For the Respondents: Mr. Vishal Sharma

The police are authorized to investigate wildlife offences under the Wildlife Protection Act, emphasizing that even attempts to commit such offences are legally actionable.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 - Sections 8/51 - Arms Act - Sections 7/27 - Quashment of FIR - Petitioner alleged false implication in wildlife offences; FIR challenged on grounds of absurdity and improbability; No animal remains recovered - Court found police empowered to investigate under Wildlife Act - Petition dismissed as meritless. (Paras 2-13)

(B) Wildlife Act - Section 50 - Investigation Powers - Police Officers empowered to investigate wildlife offences and are not limited only to authority complaints - Attempted hunting constitutes an offence, requiring factual determination at trial. (Paras 10-13)

Facts of the case:
Petitioner is a national level shooter, accused of poaching; disputes FIR allegations stemming from an incident in 2016; asserts legal possession of the firearm and claims harassment by local residents. Investigation progressed with no evidence linking him to offences stated in FIR.

Findings of Court:
The court concluded no merit in the petition for quashing the FIR, recognizing the investigation's lawful basis, and reaffirmed the idea that factual determinations necessitate a trial.

Issues: The key issues centered around the legality and basis of the FIR, and the implications of the Wildlife and Arms Acts on the petitioner's case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled on the legitimacy of police investigation under the Wildlife Act, clarifying that an attempt to commit an offence is punishable even if no remains of the animal are found; the nature of alleged contraventions necessitates a trial to explore factual outcomes.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. court's analysis of investigation powers and legal rights. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
2. final determination on the legitimacy of the petition. (Para 14 , 15)

JUDGMENT

01. Petitioner through the medium of this petition unde r Section 482 CrPC seeks quashment of FIR No. 15/2016 dated 13.04.2016 registered at Police Station Leh against him for commission of offences punishable under Section 08/51 of Wildlife Protection Act , and Sections 07/27 of Arms Act and consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

02. Petitioner has asserted that he is a national level shooter and has won many awards and accolades in National Level Shooting Competitions and that in the month of April 2016, he had gone to Ladakh for vacation and had taken along his licensed gun for repairing purpose through one of his friend who is an Army Officer and also a National Level Shooter and expert in repairing the same, under due authorization as he had an All India Arms License vide No. SWDN/12/2011/2.

03. It is stated that on 13.04.2016, he went for a ride in the official vehicle of his friend who was in Army along with his driver and was having in his legal possession his licensed weapon and while at Pathar Sahib Gurudwara road, he asked the driver to stop the vehicle and went out of the vehicle and in the said vehicle there were his cartridges as well as that of his friend and while he was walking there, around 8-9 persons in civil dress, while shouting reached the stop and started putting false allegations upon him that he had come there for shooting animals. He tried to make all of them understand that he was not doing anything wrong but they started abusing and beating him, causing several internal and external injuries. As a result, he got frightened and tried to run away in order to protect his life and liberty. However, the said unknown persons wrongfully restrained him and illegally detained him and when he threatened them to lodge a police complaint, they hatched a conspiracy against him and he and the army driver were forcibly boarded in the Scorpio vehicle and taken to a local Police Station. It was alleged that the Police under the influence of unknown local residents did not register a case against those persons and instead a complaint was entertained against him by the SHO Police Station concerned and an FIR was lodged against him for commission of offences punishable under Section 8 /51 of Wildlife Protection Act and the petitioner was wrongfully and deliberately arrested.

04. The petitioner has challenged the impugned FIR No. 15/2016 registered at Police Station Leh for commission of offences therein and sought quashment thereof on the ground that the allegations in the impugned FIR are so absurd and inherently improbable; that no prudent person can ever reach at just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against him; that he has never killed and never attempted to hunt any wild animal; that in view of the observation made by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Leh in his order 20.04.2016, granted bail in his favour that the accused had not violated the provisions of Wildlife Act, as such, no offence is made out against him; that no dead animal or meat of animal had been recovered by the Police and that FIR has been registered about four years back and since then the matter is still at the investigation stage as there was no substance in the impugned FIR and is being used just as a tool of harassment to him.

05. Pursuant to notice, respondents filed their objections to the petition in which they have asserted that on 13/04/2016 one-Tsering Angchuk, Wild Life Warden Leh, filed a written complaint to the effect on that day while he was returning from the field tour of Basgoo & Nimoo area, he received a telephonic call from Sh. Sonam Nurbu, Deputy Forester, Leh at around 4:30 p.m., informing him that he along with other wild life officials were on anti poaching tour near Magnetic Hill area, where they found some pers

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top