| 1) In a vast country like India, elephants and their owners are scattered in remote locations and it is not always possible for them to have knowledge of government notifications. In northeastern India, the Forest Department has no presence in many areas where elephants are located. 2) In some states (e.g. Assam and Nagaland) Wildlife (Protection) Rules were not framed until recently and forms for submitting declarations and issuing ownership certificates were not prescribed. 3) Section 42 empowers only the CWLW to issue ownership certificates and the power has not been delegated to the local Forest Officers. Owners generally avoid going to the state capitals to meet the CWLW for fear of harassment. 4) The fact that the Forest Department cannot take any action against the defaulters has only made elephant owners grow indifferent. Conversely, most of the circus companies, vulnerable to harassment by the forest authorities, do apply for ownership certificates. 5) Section 42 stipulates that the CWLW ‘may issue' a certificate of ownership. It suggests that the issuance of ownership certificates is subject to the discretion of the CWLW. Most of the CWLWs do not take their responsibility with regard to Section 42 with the same seriousness as other provisions of the Act. 6) Many applications have been received by the CWLWs after the date stipulated by the state government. But, the CWLWs have been under the impression that this delay constitutes an offence under the Act. There is no provision in the Act to condone such delays. Ironically, even a nominal offence in respect of captive elephants cannot be compounded under the Act (Section 54, proviso) and invites severe penalty involving imprisonment of the owner and forfeiture of the elephant. |
| Services |
| Free eMagazine Animal News & Articles 24 Hour Open Pet Store Online Query Services Veterinary Search Centre |
|
|
| © Cheerans Lab (P) Limited About us | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | Contact us | Site Map |
Search anything, anytime !