Sansar Chand vs State Of Rajasthan. País/Territorio India Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte superior Fecha Oct 20, 2010 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal Supreme Court of India Sede de la corte New Delhi Juez Markandey KatjuThakur, T.S. Idioma Inglés Materia Especies silvestres y ecosistemas Palabra clave Infracciones/sanciones Productos silvestres Especies de plantas protegidas Especies animales protegidas Especies de peces protegidas Cumplimiento/aplicación Protecíon de las especies Resumen On January 5, 2003 the police arrested one Balwan who was traveling in a train with a carton containing leopards skin. During investigation the said Balwan on January 7, 2003 made a disclosure statement to the SHO, GRP Bhilwara that the two leopard skins were to be handed over to Sansar Chand at Sadar Bazar, Delhi. The appellant was convicted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Railways), Ajmer, Rajasthan by his judgment dated 29.4.2004. The appellant filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Ajmer vide his judgment dated 19.8.2006. Thereafter the appellant filed a Revision Petition, which was dismissed by the Rajasthan High Court by the impugned judgment dated 10.12.2008. Hence, the present appeal. All the courts have found the appellant guilty of the offences charged. Sansar Chand, the appellant has a long history of such criminal activities, starting with a 1974 arrest for 680 skins including tigers, leopards and others. In the subsequent years the appellant and his gang has established a complex, interlinking smuggling network to satisfy the demand for tiger and leopard parts and skins outside Indias borders. In the present case, the extra judicial confession by Balwan has been referred to in the judgments of the learned Magistrate and the Special Judge, and it has been corroborated by the other material on record. The learned Magistrate and the Special Judge have discussed in great detail the prosecution evidence, oral as well as documentary and have found the appellant guilty. The High Court has affirmed that verdict and the Supreme Court see no reason to take a different view. The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed. Further, the Court has requested the Central and State Governments and their agencies to make all efforts to preserve the wild life of the country and take stringent actions against those who are violating the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, as this is necessary for maintaining the ecological balance in the country. Texto completo COU-156220.pdf Página web www.indiankanoon.org