Actor Mohanlal Moves Kerala High Court Challenging Magistrate's Refusal To Allow Withdrawal Of Ivory Case

Actor Mohanlal moved the Kerala High Court, challenging the order passed by JFCM, Perumbavoor, which dismissed the State Government's plea to withdraw prosecution proceedings against him in the alleged illegal possession of ivory case against him. 

In the Criminal Revision Petition moved through Advocate K. R. Radhakrishnan Nair, the revision petitioner seeks to set aside the impugned judgment passed by the Magistrate, citing that the only ground relied upon by the Magistrate is that the validity of the certificate of ownership issued by the Government as per declaration made under Section 40(4) of the Act is still pending before the Kerala High Court in a Public Interest Litigation. 

The impugned order passed by the Magistrate in June 2022, had dismissed the application by the Assistant Public Prosecutor for withdrawal of the prosecution case against the petitioner-accused. 

The Petitioner avers in the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that the two pairs of elephant seized from his home, and for which he had been charged under the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, was obtained legally. It was pursuant to a search by the Income Tax Department, the Divisional Forest Officer (DFO), Malayttoor, and the Forest Range Office (RO), Kodanad, that the tusks were seized on the ground that the Petitioner had no lawful authority to possess the same under the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. 

In the Revision Petition, it averred that both the pairs of tusks seized from his house had been given to him by the other accused who had been named, for keeping the same in safe custody, and with due authorization. In fact, it had been submitted earlier that the first pair of tusks possessed by the Petitioner was obtained from a dead captive elephant that belonged to the second accused, PN Krishnakumar, and the latter even had a certificate of ownership which had been issued to him on September 12, 1986. The second pair of tusks belonged to the Accused 4/Respondent 4 Nalini Radhakrishnan, who had inherited the same from her father-in-law who was the Maharaja of Cochin. Accused 3, K. Krishnakumar (Deceased), was the owner of the dressing table with an oval-shaped mirror fitted on the two numbers of ivory. He had made a declaration that he had purchased the same from the 3rd Accused before the Chief Wildlife Warden. On the basis of the certificate of ownership, the Assistant Public Prosecutor filed an application for withdrawal of the case under Section 321 of the Cr.P.C.

The Government of Kerala, as per the Order dated 7th February 2020, also had extended consent from the withdrawal of the prosecution case. The grounds for the same were that firstly, there was lack of successful prosecution in light of the certificates of ownership that had been issued, and secondly, that the ownership was not intentional, and hence, public interest and justice warranted an early withdrawal from the prosecution case. 

During this time, an application for intervention had also been filed by the 4th and 5th Respondents, who were third parties, which was dismissed by the Magistrate. The High Court had, at this juncture, issued directions to the Magistrate Court to proceed with the petitions, permitted the third party intervenors, and also directed the latter to pass proper orders within three weeks of its orders.

However, the Magistrate Court dismissed the application for withdrawal of the case, which the petitioner avers in his plea, was done without considering the legal and factual aspects of the case and without application of mind. 

Case Title: V. Mohanlal v. State of Kerala & Ors.