Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — Ss. 50 and 55 — Investigation by Police — Cognizance — Competency to file final report — Held, though police is empowered to investigate under S. 50(1), cognizance of wildlife offences can be taken only on a “complaint” filed by competent authority under S. 55 — Police cannot file a final report under S. 173 CrPC for offences under the Wildlife Act — Final report by police is without authority of law.

Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — Ss. 50 and 55 — Investigation by Police — Cognizance — Competency to file final report — Held, though police is empowered to investigate under S. 50(1), cognizance of wildlife offences can be taken only on a “complaint” filed by competent authority under S. 55 — Police cannot file a final report under S. 173 CrPC for offences under the Wildlife Act — Final report by police is without authority of law.

The Court held that the stand of the District Forest Officer that only police can file a final report is incorrect in law. Section 50 authorises both police and forest officers to investigate; however, Section 55 is mandatory and restricts cognizance only to complaints filed by the Director/Chief Wildlife Warden or other authorised officers. Therefore, a police final report cannot form the basis for taking cognizance.
(Para 4)

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 173 — Applicability — Wildlife offences — Held, S. 173 CrPC is inapplicable to prosecutions under Wildlife Act as cognizance is controlled exclusively by S. 55 of the Wildlife Act — Police cannot submit a charge sheet/final report for offences under the Wildlife Act.
(Para 4)

Practice and Procedure — Duty of Forest and Police Authorities — Incorrect understanding of statutory scheme — Court deprecated the incorrect stand of District Forest Officer that investigation and final report are purely police functions — Directed appearance of DFO and Police Officer for clarification.
(Paras 3–5)

Result: Directions issued — matter listed for further hearing.