Friday 31 October 2014

Tiger claws seized near Bandhavgarh

Madhya Pradesh forest officials arrested three persons with 8 tiger claws in Manpur Range of Umaria on 29 October 2014.

Tuesday 28 October 2014

Tokay Gecko seized in Manipur

On 26 October, 2014 Assam Rifles seized a Tokay gecko and other wildlife goods at Chandel district of Manipur.
http://kanglaonline.com/2014/10/five-held-with-banned-wildlife-products/

5 years imprisonment for wildlife criminals

Two persons were convicted by Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate-Dehradun on 27 October 2014 for illegal possession of a leopard skin, live pythons, cobra and other wildlife goods in April 2007. Accused were sentenced to five years imprisonment and Rs. 15,000 fine each.

Monday 27 October 2014

Murder case against 10 forest officials

After a suspected poacher from Tamil Nadu, was found dead in a river, Karnataka police booked four cases in connection with the incident, including a murder case against ten unnamed forest officials on last week.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Murder-case-against-10-forest-officials/articleshow/44935402.cms

FIR against foresters whom are fighting wildlife crime and illegal wildlife trade (the third most valuable illicit commerce behind drugs and arms) on daily basis will create a bad precedent, the state governments should follow the Assam model:


Friday 24 October 2014

Wednesday 22 October 2014

Leopard skin seized in Delhi

A person from West Champaran district of Bihar was arrested by Delhi police with a leopard skin on 20 October 2014. A case under Wildlife Protection Act was registered under FIR No. 693 at Sunlight Colony police station.

Monday 20 October 2014

Illegal wildlife traders convicted in Uttarakhand

The court of Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge Jr. Division in Purola had convicted three persons on 18 October 2014 for illegal trading a leopard skin and two gall bladders of bear in March 2011. All three accused were sentenced to three years imprisonment and Rs. 10,000 fine each.

Ivory seized in Karnataka

6.5 kg of elephant ivory was seized in Bangalore district by police on 18 October 2014.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/bangalore/Ivory-Seized-Three-Arrested/2014/10/20/article2486047.ece

Rhinoceros killed in West Bengal

A rhino was poached and its horn was took away poachers in Gorumara National Park of West Bengal on 17 October 2014. Recent incidents in North Bengal shows that rhino poachers were started to target the animals outside Assam.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/City/Kolkata/Rhino-poached-in-Gorumara/articleshow/44862486.cms

Saturday 18 October 2014

Tiger skin and pangolin scales seized in Madhya Pradesh

In two separate incidents a tiger skin was seized by police and approx. 3 kg pangolin scales were seized by forest department in Balaghat district of Madhya Pradesh on 17 October 2014.
http://www.ptinews.com/news/5255015_Two-men-caught-with-tiger-skin.html

Friday 17 October 2014

Gaur killed in Kerala

Kerala forest officials arrested three persons with around 100 kg raw meat of Gaur (Indian Bison) at North Wayanad forest division on 16 October 2014.

25 kg peacock feathers seized at Cochin Airport

Customs officials were detained two persons with 25 kg peacock feathers at Cochin International Airport, Kerala on 16 October 2014, this is the second attempt to smuggle peacock feathers in the last one month.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kochi/Duo-held-with-25kg-of-peacock-feathers/articleshow/44843030.cms

Wednesday 15 October 2014

Arms licences issued around Protected Areas

In a Public Interest Litigation, Allahabad High Court issued a direction last month to Uttar Pradesh state government that "We also issue a general direction to the effect that hereafter, no licence under the Arms Act, 1959 shall be granted in the State of U.P. without the NOC of the Chief Wild Life Warden in those areas which fall within the purview of Section 34 of the Act of 1972. The State Government shall take
necessary steps to issue directions to all the District Magistrates concerned to take steps with reference to those arms licences which have been granted without complying with the provisions of Section 34 (3) in respect of those areas which fall within a radius of ten kilometers of a sanctuary".

Poachers shot a forest guard in Pench Tiger Reserve

A Special Tiger Protection Force (STPF) forest guard with Pench Tiger Reserve, Maharashtra was shot at by suspected poachers on 14 October 2014.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/nagpur/Forest-guard-shot-at-in-Pench/articleshow/44818252.cms

Monday 13 October 2014

Friday 10 October 2014

Thursday 9 October 2014

Wednesday 8 October 2014

Tiger poaching case under trial for last 36 years !

A tiger poaching case registered in Gorakhpur district of Uttar Pradesh in 1978 is still under trial in Chief Judicial Magistrate court of Gorakhpur. For details visit following link:
http://www.jagran.com/uttar-pradesh/lucknow-city-36-year-of-pending-tiger-killing-case-11685114.html

Wednesday 1 October 2014

Accused in leopard skin seizure case acquitted

In a case registered on August 2008 by Delhi police and later prosecuted by Delhi Wildlife Department on seizure of one leopard skin, accused was acquitted by trial court and observed that:

The number of contradictions in the testimony of PWs regarding incidental aspects, the non­joining of the   public/independent witness makes the prosecution story doubtful and it does not inspire any confidence.

Prosecution has neither produced nor proved on record any DD entry showing departure of the aforesaid police personals from PS which creates doubt over their presence at the spot.

No identification memo of the case property was prepared or Placed on record.

PW2 was examined in pre­charge evidence and his further examination in chief was deferred for wants of case property but the case property remained un­identified by him as he was not examined   further   by   the   prosecution.   In   post   charge   evidence   also, case properties were not identified as PW2 opted to adopt his previous statement recorded in pre­charge evidence which was not complete, as his post charge
evidence.

No   identification   mark   was   put   on   the   case   properties   at   the   spot   before sealing the same. Therefore, chances of tampering of case property can not be ruled out and it can not be said that the case property produced before the court are the same case property which was allegedly recovered from the
possession of the accused.