Vishalakshi Amma vs State of Kerala & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

17 March 2023

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 1720 of 2023

Result

Dismissed

Bench

M.R. Shah, Manoj Misra

Citation

[2023] 2 S.C.R. 1081 : 2023 INSC 255

Headnote

Wildlife (Protection Act), 1972: ss. 40, 40A – Time for declaration of custody or possession of any captive animal or animal article – Relaxation of – On facts, the appellant filed the application/declaration on 25.05.2011 much beyond the prescribed period – Refusal of the authorised authority to issue ownership certificate in respect of the deer horn found from the house of the appellant which was in custody and possession of the appellant on the ground of delay in the application/declaration – Writ petition by the appellant – Single Judge directed the Chief Wild Life Warden to consider whether time has been relaxed in any case for the purpose of granting the certificate of ownership – Division Bench set aside the order passed by the Single Judge holding that the time limit prescribed u/r. 4(2) cannot be relaxed and/or extended – Interference with – Held: Not called for – Period of 180 days prescribed u/r. 4(2) has to be construed and considered as mandatory – Nobody can plead any ignorance or that he had no knowledge to make such declaration/application for ownership certificate – Thus, once a person in control, custody or possession of any wildlife animal or wildlife animal article, fails to file such declaration/application within the stipulated time mentioned in r. 4(2) then the bar/rigour u/s.40 would be applicable and the ownership of such wildlife animal article of which the declaration is not made shall vest in the Government/forest department – Division Bench rightly held that the application submitted by the appellant was made beyond the period prescribed u/r. 4(2) and was rightly rejected by the appropriate authority/Chief Wild Life Warden – Wild Life Stock Rules, 2003.

C. D. Gopinath v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.

2010 SCC Online Mad 2851 - referred to.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. R. SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 29.05.2020 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ Appeal No. 109/2020, by which, the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by the State of Kerala and others - respondent(s) herein and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 4772/2019, by which the learned Single Judge disposed of the said writ petition by directing the a

View Subscription Plans →