RAJENDRA KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was running the business of Carver Ivory, popularly known as Mammoth Ivory under the license as issued by the State which license stood renewed from year to year. There are certain restraints on his business which have been provided under the Wild Life (Protection) Act. It is stated by him that because of certain amendments made in Ss. 5, 27, 33, 34, 35 and 37 vide Act No. 44 of 1991 in the aforesaid Act, his livelihood has been effected and exercising powers under S. 49 of the Amended Act, he has been informed vide Annexure-4 dated 23-12-1991 to the effect that the import of ivory has been banned and, therefore, the petitioner is restrained from dealing with ivory in any and whatsoever manner subsequent to 29-2-1992. The letter Annexure-4 has given a cause of action to the petitioner for challenging the amended sections of Act 44 of 1991. It is stated by the petitioner that the provisions of the amended law do not and cannot have effect of preventing the manufacture or dealings in ivory of Mammoth animals, which animal according to the petitioner had already become extinct as long as 17,000 years B.C. and is no more in existence in the Universe. The petitioner submits that the mammoth animal was and is an extinct but was a different and distinguished from Elephant of Indian and African Region. The petitioner has reproduced certain events of even 3000 years ago and of 3rd and 4th Century to show that ivory trade had flourished in India and was one of the export item to the west and is one of the best Indian arts which is an integral part of the National Culture and relate to the work of Indian Craftsmen for their livelihood. The petitioner has traced out the history of Wild Life Protection, stating there firstly the Animal Protection Act of 1912 was promulgated which merely concerned to prevent the killing of wild birds and animals and later on for a comprehensive and practical legislation to protect the Indian Wild Life, the present Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 was enacted with the statement of objects inter alia as under :

(2.) It is stated that the list of Scheduled animals which were to be protected did not contain the Indian Elephants (Elephas Maximum). The Parliament had further amended the Act of 1972 in the year 1986 and by incorporating S. 44 the ivory imported into India was licensed. Under Chapter V-A of the amended Act prohibition of trade or commerce in trophies, animal articles, etc. derived from certain animals was prescribed.

(3.) The petitioner states vide the latest amendment vide Act 44 of 1991, passed on 20-9-1991, the Parliament had inserted the amendment with the following statement of objects. The statement of Objects provide that the decline in population of African elephant, due to illegal trade of ivory as imported in Appendix-I of the Convention in October 1989, had to be curtailed and import of ivory would no longer be possible to meet the domestic trade. If the trade is allowed to continue, it is bound to lead the large scale poaching of Indian Elephants. Aims and objects of the Amended Act are read as under :-