The Government of India enacted Wild Life (Protection)
Act 1972 with the objective of effectively protecting the
wild life of this country and to control poaching, smuggling
and illegal trade in wildlife and its derivatives.
The Act was amended in January 2003 and punishment and
penalty for offences under the Act have been made more
stringent. The Ministry has proposed further amendments
in the law by introducing more rigid measures to
strengthen the Act. The objective is to provide protection
to the listed endangered flora and fauna and ecologically
important protected areas.
The Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2013 was
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on August 5, 2013. The
Bill has been referred to the Standing Committee on
Environment and Forests. The Bill seeks to amend the
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. This Act provides for
the protection and conservation of wild animals, birds
and plants. It also covers the management of their
habitats and regulation and control of trade or
commerce linked to wild life.
According to the government, India is a party to the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and
amendments to the Act are necessary for India to
fulfill its obligations under the CITES. The key
amendments made by the Bill are:
The manufacture, sale, transport or use of animal traps
except for educational and scientific purposes (with
permission) is prohibited.\
Under the Act, destruction, exploitation or removal of any
wildlife including forest produce from a sanctuary is not
permitted, except with a permit. The amendment allows
certain activities such as grazing or movement of livestock,
bona fide use of drinking and household water by local
communities, and hunting under a permit.
Provisions to regulate international trade in endangered
species of wild fauna and flora as per the CITES have been
inserted. A schedule listing out flora and fauna for
purposes of regulation of international trade under CITES
has been added.
The Tiger and Other Endangered Species Crime
Control Bureau has been changed to the Wild life
Crime Control Bureau.
The term of punishment and fines for commission of
offences under the Act have been increased.
The Bill protects the hunting rights of Scheduled
Tribes in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands.
Meaning of wildlife conservation
According to the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972,
wildlife includes any animal, bees, butterfly,
crustacean, fish and moth; and aquatic or land
vegetation, which form part of any habitat.
Example: lion, deer, crocodiles, whales, trees and
shrubs in dense forests etc.
Therefore, wildlife refers to living organisms (flora and
fauna) in their natural habitats. But cultivated plants
and domesticated animals are not included in wildlife.
Benefits of Wildlife
Wildlife is an essential component of various food
chains, food webs, biogeochemical cycles and energy
flow through various trophic levels.
Preserves vitality and health of environment and
provides stability to various ecosystems.
Wildlife is a symbol of national pride and cultural
heritage. Over 100 years ago, there were over 1 lakh
tigers across Asia whereas today this number is below
5000 worldwide.
Wildlife is renewable source of a large variety of
commercial products like food, leathers, honey, herbal
medicines, timber etc.
Scientists and medical researchers use wildlife animals
as research materials on which trial experiments are
performed before there actual application to human
beings ( Eg. Xenotransplantation).
Project Tiger and Gir Lion Project have been launched
by the government of India to protect the tiger and
lion population in country.
Threats to wildlife
1. Habitat loss :
Population growth, fast industrialisation , urbanisation and
modernisation have all contributed to a large-scale
destruction of natural habitat of plants and animals.
2. Pollution:
Air, water, soil and noise pollution of the magnitude and
toxicity never seen before is the major factor.
Natural habitats have been destroyed or damaged by
activities such as the indiscriminate use of synthetic
materials, release of radiations and oil spills in the sea,
generation of effluents and wastes of various kinds and
toxicity, and their unscientific disposal.
Wildlife everywhere on the earth is under threat of
extinction and struggling hard for survival.
3. Indiscriminate hunting:
Indiscriminate killing and poaching of wild animals
for food, horn, fur, tusk etc. has resulted in reduction
and even extinction of many wild species.
4. Introduction of exotic species: Many native species
have known to disappear and their existence is under
threat because of the introduction of exotic and alien
species.
Conservation measures
The conservation strategies should include the
following programmes and policies:
Protection of threatened/useful plants and animals
species living in natural habitats, zoological and
botanical gardens, seed gene, tissue culture and DNA
banks.
Preservation of critical habitats of animal and plant
species plus the management of life supporting
systems in the surrounding habitats.
Hunting and international trade in wild animals and
plants products should be regulated and a strict vigil
should be maintained upon these actions. Role of
government and NGOs in spreading awareness
programmes among common people about values of
wildlife and it’s conservation.
IUCN(International Union for Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources)
The International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN, Union international pour la conservation de la
nature [UICN], in French) is an international organisation
dedicated to finding "pragmatic solutions to our most
pressing environment and development challenges".
The organization publishes the IUCN Red List of
Threatened Species, which assesses the conservation status
of species.
It works for the enlistment and preservation of endangered
species of plants and animals. Now known as the World
Conservation Union, it aims to impart information about
the distribution and status of threatened species, develop
awareness about the importance of threatened biodiversity
and guide their conservation programmes and
“ Protected areas and threatened species could most
effectively be safeguarded if local people considered it
in their own interest to do so. Working with rather
than against local people became a major working
principle for IUCN. ”
The IUCN programme for 2013-2016.
“ IUCN's stated vision is "a just world that values and
conserves nature". Its mission is to "influence,
encourage and assist societies throughout the world to
conserve nature and to ensure that any use of natural
resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable ”
The union has identified and documented endangered
species of plants and animals and has placed them into
eight “Red list” categories. The red list categories can
be regrouped into four main categories as follows:
EXTINCT SPECIES ENDANGERD SPECIES •
VULNERNABLE SPECIES & RARE SPECIES
Other measures taken for Wildlife conservation
Breeding programmes for endangered species
Prevention of poaching, hunting and bio piracy.
Case Study
State of Bihar v Murad Ali Khan AIR 1989 SC 1
In Murad Ali, the Supreme Court held that, “Challan
filed by a Station House Officer is not sufficient and a
regular complaint should be filed as provided by
Section 55 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act.” (State of
Bihar vs Murad Ali Khan, AIR, 1989, SC, 1.)
Where Wildlife warden filed complaint after obtaining
sanction from divisional forest officer, the complaint is
held to be valid.
Jagdish Singh vs State of Bihar, 1985 CRI. L. J., 1314),
(Patna High Court)
In Jagdish Singh, the Patna High Court held that, “Under
Section 55 cognizance of an offence against the Act can be
taken on the complaint of the Chief Wildlife Warden of
such other officer as the State Government may authorize
in this behalf. Under R. 13 of the Bihar Wildlife Protection
Rules 1973 framed by the State Government under S. 64,
besides Chief Wildlife Warden, the Divisional Forest
Officer or the Deputy Conservator of Forests are also
entitled to file complaint
Sec. 5(2) gives power to the authority concerned to
delegate his power to any of his subordinate officer.
Therefore, a complaint in respect of an offence under
Sec. 51 filed by the Wildlife Warden after obtaining
sanction from the Divisional Forest Officer is valid and
cognizance of the offence taken on its basis would be
valid.
Ivory Traders & Manufacturers Association v UOI AIR
1997 DEL 267
The petitioner challenged provision banning trade in
imported ivory and articles made from this ivory on
the ground that it violated their fundamental right to
carry on their trade or business u/Art.19(1)(g) of the
Constitution.
The High Court held that the prohibition was justified
since the sale of ivory by the dealers would encourage
poaching & killing of elephants .
Trade & business at the cost of disrupting life forms and
linkages necessary for the prevention of biodiversity &
ecology can not be permitted.
G.R. Simon vs. Union of India AIR 1997 DEL 301
The petitioner who was the manufacturer of coats, caps,
gloves blankets and snake skin items like bags, shoes and
brief cases challenged 1991 Amendment which prohibited
trade in animal articles. It was contended that the said Act
is colourable legislation as it indirectly takes away
fundamental right to carry on any trade or business under
Art. 19(1)(g), which cannot be done directly. Further certain
wild animals are harmful and serve no useful purpose.
While rejecting the contentions the Delhi High Court
held that every animal is important in maintaining
ecological balance and it is the duty of every Indian
citizen to protect and improve the wildlife in the
country. Further, no fundamental right is absolute and
the same can be restricted in public interest. Wildlife
protection is very much in public interest. Hence the
1991 Amendment is constitutional. Similar decision
has been given in Ivory Traders and Manufacturers
Association vs. Union of India & Indian Handicrafts
Emporium vs. Union of India.
Pradeep Krishen vs. Union of India AIR 1996 SC 2040
The petitioner challenged the order of M.P. government by
which permission was given to the villagers living near the
sanctuaries and national parks to collect tendu leaves through
contractors. In state of M.P. 11 areas have been declared as
sanctuaries and national parks covering around 12.4% of total
forest cover in M.P.
The petitioner contended that a number of trees in these areas
have been destroyed due to the entry of villagers. The Supreme
Court directed the Madhya Pradesh government to take urgent
steps to prohibit entry of villager and tribals in national parks
and sanctuaries.
Tarun Bharat Sangh, Alwar vs. Union of India AIR
1992 SC 514,516. (The Sariska case)
The petitioner Organization challenged the grant of
215 mining licenses in the area declared as Tiger
Reserve in Alwar district of Rajasthan. The Supreme
Court cancelled all the licenses as they were given in
the tiger reserve area.
Gujarat Navodaya Mandal v State of Gujarat
1998(2)GUJ.HER 359
In 1998 Reliance Petroleum limited was well into
setting up a giant refinery on the fringes of a marine
national park and sanctuary close to Jamnagar on the
coast of Gujarat.
To transport crude oil from an offshore buoy to the
refinery, the company requested the park authorities
for permission to lay a pipeline which would run
through a part of sanctuary & park.
When the Chief wild life warden issued the
permission, the petitioner challenged the permit,
claiming that it was ultra vires the Wildlife Act.
Observation
Both development and environment must go hand in
hand, in other words, there should not be
development at the cost of environment and vice-versa
but there should be development while taking due
care and ensuring the protection of environment. This
is sought to be achieved by issuing notifications like
the present, relating to developmental activities being
carried out in such a way so that unnecessary
environmental degradation does not take place. In
other words, in order to prevent ecological imbalance
and degradation that developmental activity is sought
to be regulated."
Said project will also generate employment
opportunities and the project in question is for
National interest and particularly in the interest of
State of Gujarat. Therefore, taking into consideration
this aspect and the fact that both the Central
Government and State Government have taken
necessary precaution in seeing that neither the
ecology nor environment is damaged while
implementing the project in question,
Such a huge project involving crores of rupees has
already been delayed on account of filing of the
present petition as well as earlier petitions and hence
the court do not find any reason to further stall the
same by allowing the present prayer. Therefore, reject
the same.
M/S. Gateway Hotels And Gateway Resort Ltd. vs
Nagarahole Budakattu Hakku Samiti 1999 (5) Kar LJ 63
The State govt. had assigned a portion of forest land by
way of lease in favour of the appellant without seeking
prior approval of the central govt. Sec 20 read with
35(3) of Wildlife Act prohibit grant of such rights, the
lease itself was void. In absence of such approval no
activity of renovation, repair, etc. in terms of
impugned lease deed can be carried on till the
approval of the central govt. in terms of sec. 2 of the
Forest Conservation Act.
The requirement in Section 2 for prior approval of
Central Government must be strictly construed as any
relaxation of it would be perilous to the fast depleting
forest wealth of the country. One of the directive
principles of State Police is to "safeguard the forests
and wildlife of the country" (Article 48-A of the
Constitution). One of the fundamental duties of every
citizen of India is to protect and improve forests
(Article 51-A Clause (g)).
So clearance of forest area should be allowed only as a
stark exception. When Parliament insisted that such
clearance can be made only with the prior permission
of Central Government the rule should be rigorously
followed. Forest wealth is already an endangered
bounty of nature".
De-Reservation of protected areas
Several sanctuaries are threatened by state govt. action
to lift the protective shield provided by the Wildlife
Act.
In 1998 the state proposed to trim the Borivali
National Park in Bombay so that slum dwellers who
had encroached on park land would not be evicted. In
1994 the Orissa govt. was under immense pressure to
de-notify parts of Bhitarkanika Wildlife sanctuary, a
unique mangrove ecosystem, to accommodate jetties
for fishing trawler.
Consumer Education & Research Society v UOI
2000(1)SCALE 606
In Gujarat Sanghi Cement successfully lobbied the State
Legislature to sever 320 sq.kms of the Narayan Sarovar
Wildlife Santuary to enable the co. to exploit in the region.
The provision of de-reservation was introduced by 1991
Amendment.
On 14.4.1981 the government of Gujarat, in exercise of the
powers conferred by section 18(1) of the wild Life
Protection Act, 1972, declared a part of the forest area in
Lakhpat Taluka of Kutch District as a “wild Life Sanctuary”.
The total area of the sanctuary was 765.79 sq. Kilometres.
On 27.7.1993 it cancelled that notification and issued
another whereby only a part of the said reserved forest was
declared as the ‘chinkara wild life sanctuary’. The area so
declared was 94.87 sq. Kilometres.
The said two notifications were challenged by the
petitioner by filing writ petitions in the Gujurat High
Court. The High Court quashed both those
notifications. The result was that the earlier
notification dated 14.4.1981 was revived.
Thereafter the state government made certain
inquiries and decided to delimit the area of that
sanctuary as it was found to be more than required
and the delimitation was likely to be helpful in
systematically developing that area economically by
making use of its mineral wealth.
The state legislature, thereafter on 27.7.1995, passed a
resolution to reduce the sanctuary limit to 444.23 sq.
kilometres and make an area of 321.56. sq. kilometres
rich with minerals like limestone, lignite, bauxite and
bentonite, available for the development of the said
backward area of kutchh district. The resolution was
passes in exercise of the powers conferred by section
26A(3) of the Wild life Protection Act. Pursuant to that
resolution the Government issued a notification to
that effect on 9.8.1995. The petitioner again challenged
those notifications by filing the writ a petition.
The High Court held that for about 1200 Chinkaras the
area of 444.23 Sq. Km was quite sufficient. It further
held that economic development of the area was likely
to benefit the people of Kutchh District at large and
help in protection, preservation and development of
flora and fauna of that area. As regards permission to
set up a cement plant near that area and to carry out
mining in the de-notified area, it held that proper
conditions have been imposed for preventing
pollution and to meet other environmental
requirements. Taking this view it dismissed the writ
petition.
This forest in the notified and de- notified areas in an
edaphic thorn forest. It is a desert forest but with large
number of trees. It has been identified as a potential
site for designation as a bio-sphere reserve by an
Expert committee constituted by the ministry of
environment and forest. It has been put in a “Rich area
category”, from bio-diversity point of view, by the
Gujarat Ecology Commission. Even the Union of India
in its affidavit has stated the de-notified area of the
sanctuary includes many areas of high and very high
flora and fauna value and these areas from integral
part of the Narayan Sarovar Sanctuary.
The rapid impact Assessment Report by the Wildlife
Institute of India has pointed out that any reduction in the
area of that sanctuary will reduce the number of species of
trees. It is also at the same time true, as pointed out by the
government, that this part of the kutchh district is a
backward area. There is no other possibility of industrial
development in that area, though it contains rich mineral
deposits. Therefore, if an attempt is made by the state
legislature and the state government to balance the need of
the environment and the need of economic development it
would not be proper to apply the principle of prohibition in
such a case.
The reports of the three committees only point out the
ecological importance of the area and express an
apprehension, that any major mining operation within
the notified area and large scale industrialization near
about the sanctuary as originally notified, may
adversely affect the ecological balance and bio-
diversity of that area. It would, therefore, be proper
and safer to apply the ‘principle of protection’ and the
‘principle of polluter pays’ keeping in mind the
principle of sustainable development and the
‘principle of Inter-generation equity’.
In Rajendra Kumar v. UoI , the petitioner was running an
ivory carving business under a license which was renewed
annually. The basic contention was that the trade banned
under 1991 amendment was in particular reference to
African an Asian elephants where as he was carrying on
business in mammoth ivory. The court rejected the petition
clarifying that mammoth ivory was included in ivory‘ and
that such a distinction cannot be made by an ordinary lay
man and trade in Asian elephants was being carried on
under the garb of mammoth ivory. It reemphasized its
stand on wild life trade as being one of absolute
prohibition.
Subramanian Committee Report on Illegal Trade
in Wildlife, 1994-
The Committee appointed by Ministry of
Environment, Forests & Climate Change (MoEF&CC),
Government of India has interpreted the Terms of
Reference to include the task of aligning the relevant
current statutes with present ground realities, towards
redesigning the policy space for administering
environment, forest and wildlife related laws –
conducive to a multi-dimensional ecosystem-driven
structure, focusing upon inter-generational equity.
The Committee notes that the totality of management
of the environment is currently undertaken through
the Acts, concurrently with the subordinate
legislation, rules and procedures, along with executive
instructions, which are all integrally inter-connected; a
mere tinkering with the Acts would not be adequate to
provide a coherent approach to enhance the quality of
management of environmental issues.
Accordingly suggestions for the necessary
improvements/amendments as required in the
guidelines and procedures have also been covered in
the ambit of work of the Committee.
Salient features of the report are as follows:
1. Enlisting support and co-operation of the local
people, Non-Governmental in wildlife conservation
2. To adopt through the Eco-development special
measures to Project and centrally remove the feeling of
Sponsored Eco-development alienation Scheme.
3. To reduce damage to crops and cattle, Killing of
livestock by wild animals. Compensation is provided
by various state governments for cattle killed by wild
animals.
4. Use buffer zone to meet More than 35,000 Joint
local needs through Forest Management Joint Forest
Management Committees have been formed and Eco-
development in different states in the programmes.
5. Re-location of tribal communities during settlement
process. Voluntary relocation is taken into
consideration.
6. Deployment of armed effective patrolling in squads
in the disturbed and the protected areas, in sensitive
tiger reserves
7. Communication and Funds are being provided to
transport facilities for the State Governments‘ for
wildlife personnel, wireless equipments and vehicles.
8. Provide arms to wildlife official for personal
protection.
9. Organize surprise checks by State Administration
Offices to detect transport and of movement of illegal
wildlife products.
10. Wide publicity against illegal possession of wildlife
and its products. Set up Wildlife Forensic Lab.
11. Establish Special training workshop to control
illegal wildlife trade for various enforcement agencies
like Forensic lab, Customs, CBI and military forces.
12. Establish a Central Task Action for prevention of
crime against wildlife & Enforcement Mechanism to
deal with the poaching and illegal trade in wildlife and
its products
13. Establish a Central Wildlife Crime Data Bank to
collect the components of Wildlife Trade analyse data.
