Lion Poaching: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal, Says State 'Miserably Failed' To Prove Charges

The Gujarat High Court upheld a sessions court order acquitting a man booked in a Lion poaching case observing that the prosecution had "miserably failed" to prove the charges against him and his conviction by the trial court was based on non-cogent and unconvincing circumstances. 

The court was hearing State's appeal against sessions court's 2009 order acquitting the respondent booked in a lion poaching case.It was alleged that the accused persons had arranged a trap to kill lions using sharp edged weapons and sticks and that they wanted to use the skin of the animal.

The accused persons were arrested and were brought through transfer warrant from Hubli, Karnataka and from them it was allegedly found that the respondent was closely connected to them.

The magistrate court had convicted the respondent for the offences under Section 429 (Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees)read with Section 120(b) (criminal conspiracy) IPC and sentenced to four years imprisonment. He was also convicted for the offences including Sections 9(Prohibition of Hunting),  39(Wild animals, etc., to be Government property),  43(Regulation of transfer of animal, etc.), 51(Penalties) and 52 (Attempts and abetment) of The Wildlife Protection Act and sentenced to five years imprisonment along with fine. Against this the respondent moved the sessions court.

After hearing both sides and considering the evidence on record, the sessions court i.e., appellate Court on 20.08.2009 quashed the order of conviction passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhavnagar, in Criminal Appeal no. 24/2009 and acquitted the respondent-accused.

Justice Hemant M Prachchhak in his order noted that the respondent was originally not named in the FIR and he was subsequently implicated only on the basis of the fact that a "chit containing his telephone numbers" was allegedly found in the cloth bundle among several other chits, which was seized by the police during investigation.

The court said that the while reversing the order of conviction, the Sessions Court had recorded that the prosecution mainly relied upon the evidence relating to the lie-detector test of the respondent; however it appeared that the Scientific Officer who had conducted the lie-detector test was not examined by the prosecution. 

"Therefore, the contents of the said report could not be relied upon or treated as proved against the present respondent. Even so far as the recovery of the chit containing the telephone number from original accused No. 5 in the cloth bundle is concerned, it appears that the panchwitness at Exhibit 48 had not satisfactorily explained in his evidence how the panchnama was drawn or how the said chit was recovered. After considering the aforesaid evidences of the prosecution witnesses and, more particularly, the reasons assigned by the appellate Court in paragraphs 195, 196, 198, 199, 201, 202, 204 and 205 of the impugned judgment and order, the appellate Court recorded the conclusion that, so far as the involvement of the present respondent is concerned, the prosecution had failed to prove the same beyond reasonable doubt. The appellate Court, in the aforesaid paragraphs of the impugned judgment and order, has given cogent and convincing reasons for acquitting the present respondent...

Considering the facts of the case and the evidence on record, it appears that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges against the present respondent. The respondent-accused's involvement was based merely on certain circumstances, on the basis of which the trial Court had convicted him and since the circumstances relied upon by the trial Court were not found to be convincing or cogent, the appellate Court has rightly reversed the said findings and acquitted the present respondent". 

The court said that the Sessions Court had rightly passed the order reversing the conviction of the respondent. 

Finding no error in facts or law the high court upheld the acquittal and dismissed State's appeal.