'Wildlife ecosystem diminishing': Supreme Court backs strict action under Wildlife Act

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has favoured a very strict approach by the concerned government and authorities for any offence committed under the Wildlife (Protection) Act as it upheld conviction of two men in a 2001 case of recovery of huge animal skins and other materials.

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah said the area left open to the wildlife ecosystem is diminishing everyday due to massive urbanisation, colonization, industrialisation and land-use for various commercial purposes, the threat of wildlife, flora and fauna, vanishing and even becoming extinct is real and not imaginary.

The court upheld the conviction of appellants Makbool Ahmed and Rajesh in a case of recovery of 23 kg of tiger bones, 5 tiger skulls weighing about 2.4 kg and antler horns weighing 1.9 kg in 2001.

In May 15, 2025 judgment, Justice Amanullah on behalf of the bench, however, modified their sentence from six to three years of imprisonment with fine of Rs 25,000 each, after noting casual approach by the CBI in investigation of the case.

Considering the appeal, the bench said, "Any infringement on the life and liberty of an accused should only be countenanced when the prosecution meets the standard."

The appellants assailed the validity of the Bombay High Court's 2023 judgment, which upheld the judgment by the sessions court in Nagpur in 2013.

In the case, the bench said huge quantity of banned and illegal animal products were recovered, it would obviously mean that there would have been a supplier of the seized products, and prospective buyers.

"What we can gather is that the CBI team did not have the patience to wait for the transaction to reach its logical conclusion, as the interception of only the accused took place. With regard to the supplier, it is apparent that no investigation on this behalf was pursued by the CBI. It has not even been indicated as to how the appellants were involved with and had links with the trade," the bench said.

However, this lacuna did not absolve the appellants of their liability of discharging the presumption operating against them by virtue of Section 57 of the Act. Even the Forensic Report prepared by the Wildlife Institute of India only mentions that the material belonged to tiger, panther, leopard, hyena, chital but the age of the animal products was not determined, the bench said.

"It is gainsaid that in matters of the like herein, the first and foremost duty is on the investigators, including the responsibility of ensuring full and proper forensic tests as also in-depth investigation which encompassing all possibilities, such that the chain of events from the beginning till the end is complete," the bench emphasised.