SAMIR MATHUR Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short but interesting question as to the power of the Chief Wild Life Warden to seize wild life trophies declared by a person arises for consideration in this writ petition.

(2.) The petitioner herein filed a declaration as required under S. 40 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (for short, the Act), and Rule 34 of Wild Life (Protection) (Andhra Pradesh) Rules, 1974 (for short, the Rules) on 23-8-1993. In covering letter accompanying declaration it is stated that his father late R. R. Mathur, IAS acquired tiger skin in early 1960's and same came into possession of the petitioner. After having come to know that a declaration is required to be filed with the Chief Wild Life Warden under S. 40 of the Act such a declaration was made. Respondents 2 and 3 came to petitioner's house on 4-9-1993 and confiscated the tiger skin in a box. Therefore, the writ petition is filed contending that the search and seizure is illegal.

(3.) In the counter-affidavit filed by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Wild Life Investigation, it is stated, there was long delay on the part of the petitioner in filing declaration under the Act and the Rules and the authorities entertained a doubt as to genuineness of the tiger's skin and, therefore, the same was seized. Under S. 40(1) of the Act every person at the commencement of the Act having control and custody or possession of skin of any animal has to declare to the Chief Wild Life Warden giving the description of the article. Rule 34 of the Rules provide to make declaration in Form No. 2 after coming into force of the rules. Be it also noticed under various provisions of Chapter-VA which is introduced by Wild Life (Protection) (Amendment) Act, 1986, trade or commerce in trophies, animals, articles etc. derived from certain animals is prohibited and under S. 50 of the Act they are offences.