Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(3)ALLMR411; 2003(5)BomCR46; 2002LC121(Bombay); 2003(159)ELT44(Bom)
..... on record, it is clear that the petitioner had obtained requisite permit from the authority under the export - import policy, as well as the authority under the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 and had also applied for advance permit from the cites authority in india. moreover, the petition was applied for advance permit from the cites authorities and there is ..... by a letter dated 16th may, 2002 the respondent no. 4 had stated that the imports of such items were prohibited under the import policy and under the wildlife (protection) act, 1972, and unless permission from the said authorities are obtained, permission under cites will not be granted. after obtaining the requisite permission from the authorities under the export import ..... pardus. under the circumstances, it was submitted the refusal to clear the item of panthera pardus on the alleged violation of the export/import policy and the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 was wholly unjustified and without jurisdiction.13. as regards the refusal to allow clearance of the item of panthera pardus on the ground that the advance permission of ..... joint commissioner of customs that items of panthera pardus (leopard) cannot be allowed because:-(i) panthera pardus (leopard) being a restricted item falling under schedule i of wildlife (protection) act, 1972 it cannot be imported notwithstanding any documents issued;(ii) cites management authority has not issued any advance import permit for import of items of panthera pardus, which is mandatory .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2001(4)ALLMR432; 2002(1)BomCR177
..... ownership of animals as provided in that section. that is one way of dealing with the situation. the other 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. in ..... 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 informs the chief conservator of forests of gujarat that rescue centres have been set up at five places, namely at tirupati, vishakapatnam, bangalore, ..... when the certificate is issued and cannot mean anything subsequent thereto.9. we are concerned with the wildlife (protection) act. 1972 which is enacted for the protection of the wildlife. the overriding objective of the act is to look after them and to preserve and protect them. the act is not so much concerned with the rights of the human beings to own the animals or ..... was not arising in that matter. in the matter before us, however, the same has been squarely raised. the relevant section 42 of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 reads as follows :-'42. certificate of ownership. - the chief wildlife warden may, for the purpose of section 40, issue a certificate of ownership in such form, as may be prescribed, to any person who, .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC724; 2003(2)ALLMR(SC)389; 2003(51)BLJR324; [2003(1)JCR105(SC)]; JT2002(9)SC200
..... questioning the correctness of orders issued by the states ofkarnataka and uttar pradesh respectively which according to him were inviolation of the provisions contained in the wildlife (protection) act, 1972(in short the 'act'). by order dated 14.2.2000, operation of any orderpermitting removal of certain trees from national parks, games sanctuariesand forests was injuncted. subsequently, ..... was declared to be a national park in terms ofsection 35(1) of the act. the matter was referred to the central empoweredcommittee (in short 'the committee') constituted under section 3 of theenvironment (protection) act, 1986 (in short the 'environment act'). afterhearing the parties and taking note of the materials placed before it thecommittee has ..... an appropriately global response. it is big in terms ofthe range of problems and issues - air pollution, water pollution, noisepollution, waste disposal radioactivity, pesticides, countryside protection,conservation of wildlife - the list is virtually endless. as observed by simonbell and stuart bell in 'environmental law': '.....in the words of the white paper on theenvironment. this ..... in life. the constitution has laid the foundation of articles48a and 51a for a jurisprudence of environmental protection. today, thestate and the citizen are under a fundamental obligation to protect andimprove the environment, including forests, lakes rivers, wildlife and tohave compensation for living creatures. 33. a learned jurist has said, the rig veda praises .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2004(73)DRJ42
..... of indian handicrafts emporium and ors. v. union of india and ors., with the following directions:-'respondent authorities are directed to conclude the inquiry under section 49(c) of the wildlife protection act, 1972. they shall keep the imported ivory articles with them after making a proper inventory and taking photographs of the same. the imported ivory articles shall not be destroyed till the ..... pwd and gad. 5. mr. v.k.shali, at this stage, submits that the time frame may be fixed for disposal of the applications under section 49(c) of the wildlife (protection) act. it is stated that out of 134 applications, 67 applications have been disposed of. there may not be any difficulty in fixing a reasonable time for disposal of the applications ..... that there is an inordinate delay in deciding the applications/declarations of the traders, filed under section 49(c) of the wildlife (protection) act. this is resulting in the traders continuing to hold the stocks of ivory, which is otherwise prohibited. learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of the full bench ..... the present writ petition, seeking a direction to respondent nos. 1 and 2 to hear and determine the applications/declarations of the traders, filed under section 49(c) of the wildlife (protection) act within such period as the court may deem just and proper.3. notice in the writ petition was issued on 20.9.1999. petitioner's grievance from the beginning is .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
..... the state of tamil nadu on 29.10.2012 submitted that the gulf of munnar consisting of 21 islands in 4 groups was notified under section 35(1) of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 on 10th september 1986 as this group of islands consisted of territorial waters between them and the proposal to declare gulf of munnar as a marine national park under section ..... a marine national park and extending financial assistance for the development of its ecology. he submitted that the proposal for issuance of a declaration under section 35(4) of the wildlife (protection)act, 1972 is pending for concurrence of the central government and, therefore, the ecological balance in the area of gulf of munnar would be disturbed if the plant of the appellants continues ..... industry in tuticorin area. he submitted that the government of tamil nadu, however, had issued a notification dated 10.09.1986 notifying its intention under section 35(1)of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 to declare the twenty one islands of the gulf of munnar as a marine national park, but no notification has yet been issued by the government of tamil nadu under ..... of munnar consisting of 21 is lands including the aforesaid four islands have been notified under section 35(1)of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 on 10th september 1986 and a declaration may also be made under section 35(4) of the said act declaring the gulf of munnar as a marine national park.we have, therefore, no doubt that the gulf of munnar is .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC2179; 2004(1)ALD(Cri)729; 2004(2)BLJR863; 2004CriLJ2011; 2004(2)CTC467; JT2004(4)SC52; 2004(I)OLR621; RLW2004(2)SC218; 2004(3)SCALE608; (2004)8SCC40
..... appellants by the respondent (described hereinafter as the 'complainant') alleging that they had falsely implicated him for offences under the orissa forest act, 1972 (in short 'the act'), the wildlife protection act, 1972 (in short 'the wildlife act') and being not content with the illegal acts, and that they seriously assaulted him thereby committing offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 325, 506 and 386 read with section ..... one hand, it is not every offence committed by a public servant while engaged in the performance of his official duty, which is entitled to the protection of section 197(1), an act constituting an offence, directly and reasonably connected with his official duty will require sanction for prosecution and the said provision.'use of the expression, 'official duty ..... and if sanction is granted, to confer on the government, if they choose to exercise it, complete control of the prosecution. this protection has certain limits and is available only when the alleged act done by the public servant is reasonably connected with the discharge of his official duty and is not merely a cloak for doing the ..... servants against the institution of possibly vexatious criminal proceedings for offences alleged to have been committed by them while they are acting or purporting to act as public servants. the policy of the legislature is to afford adequate protection to public servants to ensure that they are not prosecuted for anything done by them in the discharge of their .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Chennai
..... the order of the division bench of this court, the state government, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (f) of sub-section (2) of section 64 of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972, has framed the tamil nadu captive elephants (management and maintenance) rules, 2011 and they came into force w.e.f. 16.9.2011. 11. under rule 13 of these rules ..... transporting elephants in trucks for over twelve hours at a stretch. therefore, from these rules, it is clear that the legislature, in its wisdom, has framed these rules to well protect the elephants. further, while issuing g.o.(ms.)no.310, dated 1.12.2011, the government has also taken into consideration the order passed by the division bench of this ..... , 'the acts which are tantamount to cruelty to elephant and are prohibited' are listed out. rule 13(4) prohibits 'conveying or carrying an elephant, in or upon any vehicle or otherwise in .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 1999(5)KarLJ63
..... been vested in the state government, now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 35 of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 (central act 53 of 1972) the government of karnataka hereby specify the limits of the area mentioned in the schedule below which shall be comprised within the nagarhole national park ..... karnataka gazette dated 10th july, 1975, the government of karnataka in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 35 of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 (central act 53 of 1972) declared its intention to constitute the area specified in the schedule therein, to be nagarhole national park; and whereas the following events have occurred, namely:-- ..... all matters connected therewith or ancillary and incidental thereto'.10. in the statement of objects and reasons of the wildlife (protection) (amendment) act no. 23 of 1982, it was stated-'the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 (53 of 1972) provides for the protection of wild animals and birds and for matters connected therewith or ancillary thereto. 2. under the present scheme ..... r.p. sethi, c.j.1. with the proclaimed object of protecting the wildlife and preserving the ecology, the respondents alleged the violation of the wildlife (protection) act, 1972, hereinafter called the 'wildlife act' and the forest (conservation) act, 1980, hereinafter called as the 'forest act', and filed the writ petition challenging the validity of various government orders culminating in the lease .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Karnataka
..... showing due concern in the five year plans, i.e. sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth five year plans, the central government enacted the following enactments:(i) wildlife (protection) act, 1972(ii) environmental protection act, 198629. it is true, many animals are considered sacred; many plants and animals are adopted as natural symbols and cultural heritages. of them, elephant is considered to ..... term elephant conservation what ever interventions that need to be done to manage populations will be taken up with due caution.33. the wildlife (protection) act, 1972 was enacted by the parliament to provide for the protection of wild animals, birds and plants and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto with a view to ensure the ecological ..... shall have to be exempted from general/local election duties.18. there is need to initiate brain-storming exercise to proclaim unlawful acts like poaching, poisoning, electrocution, snaring of elephant/big cats coming under schedule i of wildlife (protection) act 1972, as heinous crime.19. need to inter-connect potential areas (pas) with insulated corridors to facilitate elephants from island like ..... elephants even in ail four neighbouring states namely karnataka, andhra pradesh, kerala and tamil nadu, invoking the power under section 38 of the wildlife protection act, 1972.10.6. mr. udaya holla, learned advocate general, appearing on behalf of the state as well as assisting the court, placing reliance on the report .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 2007(122)ECC7; 2007(148)LC7(Delhi); 2009(235)ELT60(Del)
..... extracting their tusks may not continue.27. the above judgment of the hon'ble supreme court is directly relevant as it deals with the interpretation of the present wildlife protection act, 1972 and leaves us in no manner of doubt that the acceptance of the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner would defeat the legislative intent and ..... 1. this writ petition challenges the criminal proceedings initiated by the officers of the customs under the provisions of the customs act, 1962 and by the officers of the wildlife department under the provisions of wildlife protection act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the act) and seizure of 12 pieces of shawls, suspected to be made of 'shahtoosh wool'. the main question raised in ..... this petition is whether the phrase 'animal article' excludes 'animal hair'. the petitioner no. 1 cottage industries exposition ltd., is an incorporated company under the provisions of the companies act, 1956, ..... the plea that the legislature had a specific intention in creating two separate entries, in the form of animal article under section 2(2) of the wildlife (protection) act and the trophy under section 2(31) of the wildlife (protection) act. in n.d.p. namboodripal v. uoi and ors. : air2007sc1782 , it was held as under:where a word defined is declared to .....Tag this Judgment!