Karnataka govt mulling over one-time clemency to Wildlife Act violators
Bengaluru (PTI): The Karnataka government is mulling providing clemency for the one last time to those who are in possession of wildlife products such as pelts, tooth, claws and various other artefacts, Forest Minister Eshwar Khandre said on Thursday.
The Minister's remarks come amid the forest department's raid at residences of a few prominent personalities and others, against whom complaints have been received that they are allegedly in possession of tiger claw or other wildlife articles.
A participant of reality show "Bigg Boss Kannada" was arrested on Sunday for sporting the tiger claw pendant.
Addressing reporters, Khandre said people are not aware of the stringent provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act-1972. He added that ever since the issue of became a talking point this week, his department is getting lots of complaints.
"I met the Chief Minister and briefed him about the case. We will take everyone's opinion and discuss with the forest officials. Government's opinion is that this should be discussed so as to provide one time clemency for the last time with regard to illegal possession of wildlife products," the Minister said.
Khandre explained that the objective behind offering one-time relief is that the Wildlife Protection Act is a stringent law and government has to take people into confidence if it has to be implemented in toto. "The objective behind strict compliance of the law is not to create a chaotic situation and terrorise people", he added.
"We will discuss with the legal experts and seek a report on this (one time clemency). Already a high level probe team has been set up. Our government and our department are committed to provide information to the people in order to give a permanent remedy to this matter."
He also appealed to the people to shun superstitious beliefs, which make them sport wildlife products such as elephant tusk, tiger claws, tooth, tiger or deer pelts without knowing that this is a punishable offence.
Khandre said the usage of such wildlife products encourage people to go for hunting and poaching endangered animals.
According to the Minister, the government had provided an opportunity to people to deposit all such wildlife products when it introduced the Wildlife Protection Act in 1972. People were also given a chance to deposit such things in 2003, he added.
Regarding the existing seized wildlife material, he said they will be destroyed since there is no scope in the law to grant ownership.
To a question whether the clemency has been thought out to bail out high profile people without trying them, Khandre said there is no question of granting relief to any individual for, everyone is equal in the eyes of law.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Disqualification row: SC unhappy over Telangana CM's statement on bye-elections
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed its displeasure over Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy's statement in the assembly that there would be no bye-elections, and said he was expected to exercise "some degree of restraint".
"Did we commit a mistake by letting him go at that time and not taking an action for contempt?" a bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih asked.
The top court was perhaps referring to a separate matter in which it had last year disapproved of Reddy's comments on the top court granting bail to rival BRS leader K Kavitha in cases linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam.
The apex court's observations came during the arguments on the pleas raising the issue of alleged delay by the Telangana Assembly speaker in deciding on petitions seeking disqualification of 10 BRS MLAs who had defected to the Congress.
The bench reserved its verdict in the matter.
During the arguments, the issue over Reddy's recent statement in the assembly cropped up before the bench.
"Mr Singhvi, having experience of earlier occasion, was the chief minister not expected to at least exercise some degree of restraint?" Justice Gavai asked senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, who was appearing for the assembly speaker.
Justice Gavai said the court was not bothered about statements of politicians.
"We exercise self-restraint. We respect the other two wings of the democracy. Same is expected of the other two wings also," he said.
Senior advocate C A Sundaram, representing the petitioner and BRS leader Padi Kaushik Reddy, referred to the transcripts of the chief minister's statement, calling it shocking.
A BRS MLA, the counsel said, had said in the assembly that this should not be raked up as the matter was pending before the apex court but the chief minister still made the statement.
Sundaram quoted the chief minister's statement as saying, "Mr speaker, I am telling on your behalf to everyone present in the assembly that they need not worry about any bye-elections in future. No Bye-elections will come".
Sundaram said when the chief minister made the statement, the speaker did not say anything.
During the hearing, the bench asked what would be the "reasonable period" for a speaker to decide on the disqualification petitions.
It asked whether such applications for disqualification "should be permitted to die its natural death and the Tenth Schedule be thrown in the dustbin?".
The Tenth Schedule of the Constitution deals with provisions on disqualification on the ground of defection.
Sundaram requested the bench to put a time limit for deciding the disqualification petitions, referring to it as an "extraordinary situation".
Reddy had allegedly said in the assembly on March 26 that there would be no bye-elections even if BRS members switched sides.
"If this is said on the floor of the house, your chief minister is making a mockery of the Tenth Schedule," the bench said on April 2.
The apex court had also asked the speaker why he took about 10 months to issue notices on the petitions for the disqualification of BRS MLAs who defected to the Congress.
While one of the pleas in the apex court has challenged the November 2024 order of the Telangana High Court in a matter concerning petitions seeking the disqualification of three BRS MLAs, another petition relates to the remaining seven legislators who defected.
A division bench of the high court in November last year said the Assembly speaker must decide the disqualification petitions against the three MLAs within a "reasonable time".
The division bench's verdict came on the appeals against the September 9, 2024, order of a single judge.
The single judge had directed the secretary of the Telangana Assembly to place the petition seeking the disqualifications before the speaker for fixing a schedule of hearing within four weeks.
On March 4, the apex court sought responses from the Telangana government and others on the pleas, saying a timely decision was the key and there could not be a case of "operation successful but patient is dead".
It had also sought the responses of MLAs Danam Nagender, Venkata Rao Tellam and Kadiyam Srihari in the matter.
