Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal  ||  Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination  ||  Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal  ||  Allahabad High Court: Law Treats All Equally, State Cannot Gain Undue Benefit from Delay Condonation  ||  SC: SARFAESI Act Was Not Applicable in Nagaland Before its 2021 Adoption, Dismisses Creditor’s Plea  ||  SC: Lis Pendens Applies To Money Suits on Mortgaged Property, Including Ex Parte Proceedings  ||  Kerala HC: Civil Courts Cannot Grant Injunctions in NCLT Matters and Such Orders Can Be Set Aside  ||  Bombay High Court: Technical Breaks to Temporary Employees Cannot Deny Maternity Leave Benefits  ||  NCLAT: Appellate Jurisdiction Limited to Orders Deciding Parties’ Rights, Not Procedural Directions    

Chua Ram Miri (Saikia) v. Commissioner of Plains Division, Assam - (High Court of Gauhati) (21 Mar 1968)

Drawing distinction between human and animal life

MANU/GH/0078/1968

Civil

Poaching and hunting animals for game has witnessed only a gradual build up in public ire. Animal life is rarely seen as equatable to human life, and ills caused to animals are not the same those perpetrated on humans. Gauhati High Court in a case involving a gun licence concluded as much in 1968. Hearing a case about the revocation of a licence to own a firearm for it being used to hunt animals, the court drew a clear line between “public peace” and “public security” and acts injuring wildlife: “‘Public peace’ or ‘Public safety’ relate to the peace and safety of the people and do not appertain to animal life”. The licence holder, simply suspected of poaching in the Kaziranga Game Sanctuary could therefore not be deprived of his licence to possess a firearm. Perhaps attitudes to violence towards an already fragile ecosystem today would illicit a different response. Or maybe discharging a firearm in any public place would supersede even that.

Relevant : Section 17 Arms Act, 1959

Tags : FIREARM   LICENCE   POACHING   PUBLIC SAFETY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved