Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a law graduate, filed a Public Interest
Litigation (PIL) before the Tripura High Court seeking directions against the
Union of India and other authorities regarding the possession and regulation of
exotic animals and birds in India. The petitioner relied upon news reports
alleging an increase in the trade of exotic wildlife species and contended that
persons possessing exotic animals without making voluntary disclosure under the
Ministry of Environment's Advisory dated 11.06.2020 should be treated as acting
illegally.
The petitioner further requested the Court to direct the Government to amend the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Customs Act, 1962 so that exotic species would be specifically included within the statutory framework, enabling prosecution, confiscation, and stricter enforcement against persons possessing undeclared exotic animals.
Issues Involved
- Whether
persons possessing exotic animals without making voluntary disclosure
under the Advisory dated 11.06.2020 are liable for prosecution under the
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Customs Act, 1962.
- Whether
the High Court can direct the Central Government to amend the Wildlife
(Protection) Act, 1972 and the Customs Act, 1962 to include exotic
species.
- Whether
non-declaration of exotic animals automatically gives rise to criminal
liability, seizure, confiscation, or prosecution.
- Whether the Advisory dated 11.06.2020 alters the existing statutory position relating to exotic species.
Petitioner's Arguments
The petitioner argued that:
- The
Advisory dated 11.06.2020 granted an opportunity for voluntary disclosure
of exotic species, and persons who failed to disclose within the
stipulated period should not receive the same legal protection as
compliant persons.
- Exotic
animals are frequently subjected to illegal smuggling and cruelty,
requiring stronger statutory protection.
- Exotic
species should be included within the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
- Notifications
under Sections 11B, 123 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 should be amended
so that undeclared exotic species become liable to confiscation and owners
become subject to prosecution.
- Offences
relating to exotic species should be treated as non-bailable to enable
effective investigation and custodial interrogation.
- The Court should issue appropriate directions to the Government for legislative amendments in public interest.
Respondents' Arguments
The respondents relied upon the existing statutory framework
and earlier judicial precedents and submitted that:
- The
Advisory dated 11.06.2020 was only intended to create an inventory of
exotic live species and streamline CITES compliance.
- The
Advisory did not amend any statutory provision under the Wildlife
(Protection) Act, 1972 or the Customs Act, 1962.
- Existing
judgments of various High Courts and the Supreme Court had already upheld
the legality and validity of the Advisory.
- Domestic
possession, breeding, transportation and trade of exotic species continue
to remain outside the scope of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 unless
Parliament provides otherwise.
- Courts cannot compel the Government to enact or amend legislation according to judicial directions.
Court Order / Findings
The Tripura High Court dismissed the PIL and held that:
- The
Advisory dated 11.06.2020 merely provides an administrative mechanism for
voluntary disclosure and regulation of imported exotic species and does
not amend the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 or the Customs Act, 1962.
- The
Court reaffirmed earlier decisions of the Allahabad High Court, Bombay
High Court, Delhi High Court, Rajasthan High Court, Meghalaya High Court
and the Supreme Court, all of which upheld the validity of the Advisory.
- Domestic
trade, possession, transportation and captive breeding of exotic animals
continue to remain outside the scope of the Wildlife (Protection) Act,
1972 under the existing legal framework.
- Undeclared
exotic animals are not notified under Sections 11B or 123 of the Customs
Act, 1962; therefore, statutory presumptions and reverse burden provisions
are inapplicable.
- Offences
concerning exotic live species continue to remain bailable under Section
104(7) of the Customs Act, 1962 in the absence of any notification
declaring such species as prohibited goods under Section 135.
- Courts
cannot direct Parliament or the Executive to introduce amendments, create
new offences, alter classifications of offences, or legislate in a
particular manner.
- Mere
failure to make voluntary disclosure does not automatically establish
illegal importation, nor can it justify arrest, confiscation or
prosecution without statutory authority.
- Presuming
illegal import solely because a person failed to disclose ownership would
violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Accordingly, all reliefs sought by the petitioner were rejected and the PIL was dismissed without costs.
Important Clarification
This judgment reiterates that:
- The
Advisory dated 11.06.2020 does not create new criminal offences.
- It
does not amend the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 or the Customs Act,
1962.
- Courts
cannot compel the Government to enact legislation or amend statutes.
- Possession
of exotic animals within India is governed by the existing statutory
framework unless Parliament specifically provides otherwise.
- Non-disclosure
under the Advisory does not automatically attract prosecution,
confiscation or seizure.
- Customs authorities continue to have jurisdiction over illegal import or export activities involving exotic species at international borders in accordance with the Customs Act, CITES and the Foreign Trade Policy.
Section Involved
- Article
14 of the Constitution of India
- Article
21 of the Constitution of India
- Wildlife
(Protection) Act, 1972
- Customs
Act, 1962
- Sections
11B, 11C to 11F, 123, 104(7) and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962
- Advisory
dated 11.06.2020 relating to Voluntary Disclosure of Exotic Live Species
- CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)
Link to Download the Order
https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1785144887_2088compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment