LexSANSAR CHAND versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 12 S.C.R. 583 SANSAR CHAND v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN (Criminal Appeal No. 2024 of 2010) OCTOBER 20, 2010 [MARKANDEY KAT JU AND T.S. THAKUR, JJ.] A B Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 - /l/ega/ trade in wildlife by accused - Accused into this illegal trade for past 30 years - Accused prosecuted and convicted by various courts - In the C instant case, disclosure statement by one that he was carrying leopard skins which were to be handed over to accused - Conviction of accused on basis thereof, by courts below - On appeal, held: Extra-judicial confession corroborated by other material on record establishing the guilt ofacc;used - Large o amount of oral and documentary evidence - Thu$, accused rightly held guilty beyond reasonable doubt - Evidence. . . · Wildlife - Poaching of wildlife - Resulting in extinction of wild animals like tiger, leopard and bison - Direction to the E . Government and its agencies to take steps to preserye wildlife of the country - Stringent action against those indulging in such crimes. The appellant is into the illegal trade in wild life since the year 1974 when he was barely 16 years. The appellant F and his gangs have established an interlinking smuggling network. He has been arrested fo~ 680 skins including tigers, leopards and others. In the instant case, 'B' was traveling in a train with a G carton containing leopard's skin. The police arrested him. During investigation, 'B' made a disclosure statement to the SHO that the said two leopard skins were to be handed over to the appellant. The appellant was charge 583 H 584 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 12 S.C.R. A sheeted for the offence and was convicted by the courts below. Therefore, the appellants filed the instant appeal. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 The instant case reveals how avaricious B and rapacious persons have by organized crime destroyed large parts of the wild life of India and brought many animals e.g. tigers, leopards, bison, etc. almost to the brink of extinction, thereby seriously jeopardizing and destroying the ecological chain and ecological c balance in the environment. [Para 3] [587-D-E] 1.2 India, at one time, had une of the richest and most varied fauna in the world. However, over the last several decades there has been rapid decline of India's wild D animals and birds which is a cause of grave concern. Some wild animals and birds have already become e><tinct e.g. the cheetah and others are. on the brink of extinction. Areas which were once teeming with wild life tiave become devoid of it, and many sanctuaries and E parks are empty or almost empty of animals and birds. The Sariska Tiger Reserve in Rajasthan and the Panna Tiger Reserve in Madhya Pradesh today have no tigers. The wild life in India has already been considerably destroyed. At one time there were hundreds of thousands F of tigers, leopards and other wild animals, but today there are only about 1400 tigers left, according to the Wildlife • Institute. [Paras 5 and 13] [587-G-H] [588-A] [589-G] 1.3 There is virtually no market for the skins or bones of tigers and leopards within India. The evidence G available points out that tigers and leopards, poached in the Indian wilderness, are then smuggled across the border to meet the demand for their products in neighbouring countries such as China. When dealing with tiger and leopard poachers and traders, it is, H SANSAR CHAND v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN 585 therefore, important to bear in mind that one is dealing A with trans-national organized crime. The accused in these cases represents a link in a larger criminal network that stretch·es across borders. This network starts with a poacher who in most cases is a poor tribal and a skilled hunter. Poachers kill tigers and leopards so as to supply B the orders placed by a trader in a larger city centre such as Delhi. These traders are very wealthy and influential men. [Para 16] [590-F-H] [591-A] 2.1 The persons like the appellant are the head of a . gang of criminals who do illegal trade in wildlife. They C themselves do not do poaching, but they hire persons to do the actual work of poaching. Thus, a person like the appellant (leader of the gang) remains behind the scene, and for this reasons it is not always possible and easy to get direct evidence against him. [Paras 23 and 31] [593- D H] [594-A] [595-F] 2.2 The appellant has been doing the said illegal. trad
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.