Confession Recorded By Forest Ranger Has No Legal Sanctity: Kerala High Court, Calls For Amendments In Wild Life (Protection) Act

The Kerala High Court on Friday said that only the Assistant Director Of Wild Life Preservation or Assistant Conservator of Forests authorised by the State Government are competent to record confession statements under Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

Granting pre-arrest bail to three accused who have been booked for offences punishable under the Act, Justice A. Badharudeen observed that the legal question is emphatically clear that the competent persons to record and receive evidence are Assistant Director, Wild Life Preservation or Assistant Conservator of Forests authorised by the State Government in this regard and no other officer/officers below their rank.

"Any officer not below their rank cannot have the power to do any acts provided as (a) to (d) [Section 50(8)] and if anything done by the officer below the rank is a nullity and has no legal effect. Be it as may, the confession recorded by the Forest Ranger is a nullity and the same has no legal effect," the court said.

The court said the confession statement relied on by the prosecution to array the accused in the case is "a statement recorded by an incompetent officer and the same has no legal sanctity."

However, fearing the outcome of the investigation done by the officers below the rank of Assistant Director of Wild Life Preservation and Assistant Conservator of Forests, the court said it is the need of the hour to invite the attention of the legislature to make appropriate legislative amendments in the 1972 Act.

The Court directed the Director General of Prosecution to forward the copy of the judgment to the appropriate Government with a request to consider necessary amendments in the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

In the case, the prosecution had received a secret information that a person had stored Sambar deer meat at his residence. When a search was conducted, cooked deer meat, raw deer meat, vessels used for cooking the meat and the meat and knife used were recovered from his residence.

Accordingly, a case was registered alleging the commission of offences punishable under Section 9, 39, 50, 51 r/w 2(16), 2(20) and 2(36) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. On the basis of the confession statement given by the main accused, three more persons were arrayed in the case. The three persons approached the high court for bail. 

The counsel appearing for the petitioners pointed out that the Forest Ranger, who is not authorised under Section 50(8) of the Act, investigated the case and recorded the confession of the accused persons. 

Section 50 deals with the power of entry, search, arrest and detention of persons involved in offences under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

The Court after perusing the provision observed that by way of an amendment with effect from Act 16 of 2003, the Assistant Director of Wild Life Preservation was authorised to issue a search warrant, to enforce the attendance of witnesses, to compel the discovery and production of documents and material objects; and to receive and record evidence.

"Thereafter, by way of amendment introduced by amendment Act 44 of 1991, Assistant Conservator of Forest was authorised by the State Government in this behalf also was given the power to do the said exercise since Section 50(8) authorises an officer not below the rank of Assistant Director of Wild Life Preservation or Assistant Conservator of Forests to receive and record evidence," the Court observed. 

The court said apart from the confession statement, other evidence connecting the accused has not yet been collected. "In view of the above circumstances, there is no need to arrest and detain the petitioners/accused Nos.2 to 4 in the given facts of this case. Therefore, I am inclined to release the petitioners on anticipatory bail on conditions," it added.

Advocate Aashique Akthar Hajjigothi appeared for the Petitioners. 

Advocate Sheeba Thomas appeared for the Respondent. 

Case Title: Prakashan and Ors. v. State of Kerala 

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 54

Click Here To Read/Download The Order