Ecolex Logo
Le portail au
droit de l'environnement
Résultats de la recherche » Jurisprudence

Ajay Shankar And Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors.

Pays/Territoire
Inde
Type de cour
Nationale - cour supérieure
Date
Jul 12, 2001
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Nom du tribunal
High Court of Bombay
Juge
Gokhale, H.
Bhosale, D.
Numéro de référence
2002 (1) BomCR 177
Langue
Anglais
Sujet
Espèces sauvages et écosystèmes
Résumé
The petitioners are running three different Circus Companies known as Jumbo Circus, Great Royal Circus and Rambo Circus respectively. Amongst other animals they are having in their custody lions, panthers, tigers and bears. In the present petition, they are challenging the letter dated 6th June, 2000 issued by the Director (Law) & Member Secretary, Government of India and addressed to the Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) ,concerning the cancellation of certificate of ownership issued in regard to five categories of animals which are lion, tiger, panther, bear and monkey. These certificates of ownership are issued by the Chief Wildlife Warden under section 42 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. The letter under challenge in the present petition is a sort of a sequitur to the earlier notification under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Petitioners submit that if the impugned letter is acted upon, it will lead to depriving them of their ownership over these animals by a procedure not provided for in law. The overriding objective of the Act is to look after the animals and to preserve and protect them. Therefore when section 42, providing for issuance of a certificate, talks about a certificate to be issued for a lawful possession, it will have to be read that while keeping the animals in possession, they will have to be treated in accordance with law. In case of cruelty The remedy can certainly be under section 42 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 itself by cancelling the certificate of ownership because power to grant a certificate will certainly have to be read as including power to rescind or cancel the certificate. If the Chief Wildlife Warden forms an opinion that there is an urgent need to cancel the certificate of ownership, he may do so, but then he will have to hear the person concerned thereafter. A requirement of such a hearing will have to be read under section 42 of the Act because the person concerned is going to be divested of his ownership with respect to those animals and, in the event, he has spent a good amount to purchase them, surely he should have a right to make his submission on his ownership, his opposition to any such decision and in any case the compensation that he ought to receive.
Texte intégral
COU-156180.pdf
Site web
www.indiankanoon.org