JUDGMENT : 1. These two revisions arise out of Regular Criminal Case No. 236/2001 and therefore, they are being disposed of by the common judgment. 2. The applicant in Cri. Revision No. 82/2013 is the original accused no.1 and the applicant in Cri. Revision No. 83/2013 is the original accused no.2. In this judgment, they shall be referred by their nomenclature as accused no.1 and accused no.2. 3. Challenge in these revision applications is to the common judgment and order dated 23.05.2013, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Criminal Appeal Nos. 88/2007 and 97/2007, whereby learned Judge has dismissed the appeals filed by accused nos.1 and 2 against the judgment and order of their conviction and sentence passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur in Regular Criminal Case No. 236/2001 dated 09.04.2007 for the offence punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 49, 49-B and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1972” for short). Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on conviction of accused nos.1 and 2, had sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year. 4. The facts are as follows: A secret information was received by Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Investigation Unit (SIU) No.II, New Delhi that accused nos.1 and 2 are indulging in illegal trade of Tiger skin and wild animal products. They are likely to deliver a huge quantity of wild animal products to unknown persons in Nagpur in the 3rd week of March, 2001. The information was recorded. On the basis of said information, the Superintendent of Police, CBI, Unit No.XI assigned the task to work out the information to PW4 Shri A.K. Bassi, Inspector. PW4 came to Nagpur. He maintained regular contact with the source/informer. On 21.03.2001, the informer informed PW4 that the accused are likely to deliver huge quantity of Tiger skin and wild animal products to unknown persons at 16.40 hours at M.H.K.S. Mohd. Ali Petrol pump, Nagpur. He further informed that they would be coming there in a Maruti car. PW4 made a written request to the Regional Labour Commissioner, Nagpur and Patent Information System, Nagpur for making services of two government servants available. Ali Petrol pump, Nagpur. He further informed that they would be coming there in a Maruti car. PW4 made a written request to the Regional Labour Commissioner, Nagpur and Patent Information System, Nagpur for making services of two government servants available. The Labour Commissioner deputed Shri K.G. Sadawarte and Shri Umesh Bhosale to act as panch witnesses. The panchas came to the office of PW4 at Nagpur. PW4 apprised them about the information received by him and the proposed raid to apprehend the culprits. 5. PW4 briefed the panchas as well as other team members namely Inspector Jagdishprasad (PW6) and other staff from CBI office. They left for the spot at 2.45 p.m. They reached the spot at 3.15 p.m. PW4 and other team members laid a trap and took position at the petrol pump. At about 16.30 hours, the informer contacted PW4 and pointed out a silver colour Maruti Esteem car bearing registration No. MH-18/C-833 parked in the premises of the petrol pump. The informer told him that two persons were sitting in the car with the tiger skin and other wild animal products. PW4 along with panchas and other team members surrounded the car. They disclosed their identity to the occupants of the car. PW4 apprised the accused about the information received by him and for the said purpose they wanted to take search of the car. The accused got perplexed. On enquiry, they disclosed their names as Maqbool Ahmad S/o Khurshid Ahmed, r/o Warispura, Kamptee (accused no.1) ; and Rajesh Devidas Dube, r/o Parsipura, Kamptee, Dist. Nagpur (accused no.2). Accused no.1 was found sitting at the driver’s seat. Accused no.2 was sitting at the rear seat of the car. People gahered on the spot after noticing the commotion. PW4 made a request to some of themto act as witness in the case. One person by name Rambhau Mangruji Kuthe (PW1), working as Manager at the said petrol pump, agreed to act as a panch. The raiding party found one tiger skin on the front seat and antler horns, 10 claws, 3 teeth on the rear seat of the car. They took search of the car. In the dicky of the car, they found gunny bags containing 23 kg tiger bones, 5 tiger skulls weighing about 2 Kg and 400 gms, and antler horns weighing 1 Kg and 900 gms. They took search of the car. In the dicky of the car, they found gunny bags containing 23 kg tiger bones, 5 tiger skulls weighing about 2 Kg and 400 gms, and antler horns weighing 1 Kg and 900 gms. The wild animal products were taken out of the gunny bag. The tiger skin and other animal products were counted, numbered and packed in white cloth. The packets were labeled with the signatures of panchas and CBI officials and sealed. A seizure panchanama was drawn. After completion of the work of sealing, the seal was handed over to panch witness by name Umesh Bhosale (PW2). The accused were arrested. 6. On the next day i.e. on 22.03.2001, PW4 prepared a special report and forwarded it to the office of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, C.B.I., S.I.U-XI, Camp at Nagpur. On the basis of this report, crime was registered against the accused vide crime No. RCS IB2001E 0002. The investigation was handed over to P.I. Shekhar Bajaj (PW13). He conducted the investigation. He forwarded the case property to the Director, Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun for analysis. The expert, on analysis, gave an opinion that the skin and the claws were of tiger. The Investigating Officer after completion of investigation submitted the investigation papers before Shri M.C. Sahani, Dy. Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., S.I.U-XI. Dy.S.P. Shri Sahani (PW12) on being satisfied that the offences as stated above were made out, being the competent authority, filed written complaint in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur on 21.12.2001. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offences. 7. After framing of Charge, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses to bring home the guilt against the accused. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, on consideration of the evidence, found the said evidence sufficient to prove the charge against the accused. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted and sentenced the accused as above. The accused preferred separate appeals in the Sessions Court at Nagpur. The learned Additional Sessions Judge concurred with the view taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate and dismissed both the appeals. Accused nos.1 and 2 are before this Court against the said judgment and order. 8. I have heard Mr. R.M. Patwardhan, learned advocate for accused no.1, Mr. Abdul Bashir, learned advocate for accused no.2 and Mrs. Mugdha Chandurkar, learned Special Advocate for the CBI. Accused nos.1 and 2 are before this Court against the said judgment and order. 8. I have heard Mr. R.M. Patwardhan, learned advocate for accused no.1, Mr. Abdul Bashir, learned advocate for accused no.2 and Mrs. Mugdha Chandurkar, learned Special Advocate for the CBI. I have gone through the record and proceedings. 9. Learned advocates for accused nos.1 and 2 submitted that CBI had no authority to conduct the investigation with regard to the offences punishable under the Act of 1972. Learned advocates submitted that there was no order by the Government of Maharashtra according permission to the CBI to conduct investigation in the State of Maharashtra. Learned advocates submitted that such an order was necessary from the State Government because the CBI is working under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. Learned advocates further submitted that in this case PW12 Mr. M.C. Sahani, Dy.S.P. had no authority to file the complaint as per Section 55 of the Act of 1972. Learned advocates, therefore, submitted that the entire prosecution got vitiated. 10. Learned advocates further submitted that in this case, the investigation conducted by CBI is faulty. There are major lacunae in the case of CBI, but the Courts below have glossed over those major lacunae and defects in the case of CBI. Learned advocates submitted that except PW1 and PW2, the remaining witnesses are interested witnesses being the CBI officials. Learned advocates pointed out that as per the contention of PW4, the information received in CBI office at Delhi was recorded, but the said record has not been produced and there is no plausible explanation in that regard. Learned advocates submitted that this creates doubt about the case of the CBI from very inception. Learned advocates submitted that there are major inconsistencies in the evidence of two pancha witnesses i.e. P.W1 and P.W.2 on material aspects. Learned advocates submitted that on account of various inconsistencies in the evidence of panch witnesses, the raid, apprehension of the accused and seizure of the articles has become doubtful. Learned advocates pointed out that panch witness PW1 has admitted that half an hour before the raid, accused no.2 had approached him and made a request to provide him job at petrol pump. Learned advocates submitted that therefore, the case of CBI that accused nos.1 and 2 on interception of the car were found inside the car with the articles, becomes doubtful. Learned advocates submitted that therefore, the case of CBI that accused nos.1 and 2 on interception of the car were found inside the car with the articles, becomes doubtful. Learned advocates submitted that the Investigating Officer (PW13) has admitted in his evidence that accused no.1 on being questioned, disclosed him that one Madhu had provided him the tiger skin. Learned advocates submitted that no investigation was conducted to know the whereabouts of said Madhu. It is pointed out that one Madhu was, therefore, the kingpin in commission of the crime. Learned advocates submitted that in the cross-examination of PW1 and PW2, they have given vital and important admissions consistent with the defence of the accused persons, but the Courts below have failed to appreciate the same. 11. Learned advocates submitted that as per the prosecution witnesses, though four persons were apprehended by the CBI officers, two persons were allowed to go scot free. Learned advocates submitted that therefore, the case of CBI that only two persons were found in the car and were apprehended, is doubtful. Learned Advocates submitted that with the major lacunae, flaws and inconsistencies, the Courts below instead of acquitting the accused persons, awarded sentence of six years’ rigorous imprisonment. Learned advocates submitted that if this Court is not inclined to accept the submissions advanced by them, then the order with regard to substantive sentence is required to be set aside or modified. 12. Learned advocates for the accused persons further submitted that the report of the expert is not cogent and reliable. Learned advocates pointed out that the articles were sent to the expert after four months of the seizure. Learned advocates submitted that during this period of four months, putrefication of the articles could not be ruled out. Learned advocates submitted that therefore, the report of the expert is required to be kept out of consideration. 13. Learned advocate Mrs. Mugdha Chandurkar for CBI submitted that technical objection with regard to the power of the CBI to investigate the crime under the Act of 1972 and the competence of PW12 to file the complaint has been challenged for the first time. Learned advocate submitted that this objection is without substance. 13. Learned advocate Mrs. Mugdha Chandurkar for CBI submitted that technical objection with regard to the power of the CBI to investigate the crime under the Act of 1972 and the competence of PW12 to file the complaint has been challenged for the first time. Learned advocate submitted that this objection is without substance. Learned advocate has pointed out that PW12 at the relevant time was holding the rank of Dy.Superintendent of Police and therefore, in terms of notification dated 07.04.2000, he was authorized to file the complaint under Section 55 of the Act of 1972. As far as second technical objection is concerned, learned Advocate pointed out that the Home Department, Government of Maharashtra had accorded consent to the members of Delhi Special Police Establishment vide Government order of Home Department dated 22.02.1989. Learned advocates submitted that this order was continued from time to time till 21.10.2020 when it was withdrawn by the Government of Maharashtra. Learned advocate in order to substantiate this submissions has relied upon the decision in the case of Param Bir Singh S/o. Hoshiyar Singh vs. State of Maharashtra and others, reported at (2021) 2 Bom.C.R. (Cri.) 631. Learned advocate submitted that on both the counts, there is no substance in the objection. 14. Learned advocate for CBI submitted that the evidence adduced by the CBI to bring home the guilt against the accused is cogent, concrete and reliable. Learned advocate submitted that PW4, who was posted at New Delhi at the relevant time, was deputed to workout the information received by CBI office, New Delhi. Learned advocate submitted that in the process of conducting raid and seizure, the possibility of a mistake here and there cannot be ruled out because no person can claim to be perfect in all respect. Learned advocate submitted that on the basis of the answers given by the witnesses in their respective cross-examination, the very core and crux of the case of CBI has not been dented at all. Learned advocate submitted that despite inconsistencies, though on minor aspects, the evidence of the independent witnesses PW1 and PW2 is consistent and on the basis of said evidence, it has been proved that the raid was conducted on the given date, given time and at the given place. The accused were apprehended and on interception of the car, tiger skin and other wild animal products were recovered from their possession. The accused were apprehended and on interception of the car, tiger skin and other wild animal products were recovered from their possession. Learned advocate submitted that a layman like panch witness is bound to forget certain things with the passage of time and as such may not be able to depose the same with clinical precision before the Court at the time of the evidence. Learned advocate submitted that the Court has to see whether the core and crux of the evidence has been shaken or not. In the submission of the learned advocate, in this case, a gruelling and searching cross-examination conducted on behalf of the accused has not demonstrated that the very core and crux of the evidence of these witnesses has been shattered and dented. Learned advocate submitted that CBI officers had no grudge or reason to implicate the accused. Learned advocate submitted that it is not the defence of the accused that huge quantity of wild animal products recovered from any other place or source, has been foisted in their name. Learned advocate submitted that in this case, by cogent oral and documentary evidence, the recovery of huge quantity of wild animal products has been proved. Learned advocate pointed out that the report of the expert has confirmed that the articles received for examination/analysis were the wild animal parts/products. Learned advocate submitted that the Courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact. Learned advocate relying upon the decision in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh Anand and others, reported at (2004) 7 SCC 659 submitted that the revisional powers cannot be exercised as second appellate power and the concurrent findings cannot be upset by re-examining the entire evidence. 15. As far as the first technical objection is concerned, in my view, there is no substance in the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the accused. PW12 in his evidence has stated that as per the notification dated 07.04.2000, issued by Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India, the officer of the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and above is competent to file the complaint in the Court under Section 55 of the Act of 1972. It is true that this notification was not produced on record at the time of his evidence. However, this witness has categorically stated about the said notification in his evidence. It is true that this notification was not produced on record at the time of his evidence. However, this witness has categorically stated about the said notification in his evidence. The notification issued by the Government has presumptive value. It can be proved by production of the copy of the notification. Learned advocate for CBI has placed on record a copy of the said notification. Perusal of the copy of the notification would show that an officer, not below the rank of Dy.S.P. is authorized to file the complaint under the provisions of the Act of 1972. The notification was issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (a) of Section 55 of the Act of 1972. In my view, therefore, the first technical objection has to be rejected. 16. The second technical objection is with regard to the powers of CBI to investigate the offence in the State of Maharashtra. Learned advocates for the accused submitted that there was no consent accorded by the Government of Maharashtra to the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to conduct investigation in the State of Maharashtra. In order to meet this objection, learned advocate for CBI submitted that the Division Bench of this court in Param Bir singh’s case (supra) has dealt with this aspect. The relevant observations can be found from paragraph 33 of the judgment. The same is extracted below : “33. Shri Nankani also invited our attention to an order dated October 21, 2020 of the Home Department, Government of Maharashtra, which purports to withdraw the consent accorded to the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment vide Government Order of the Home Department dated February 22, 1989 as also by any other instruments issued by the Government of Maharashtra from time to time, to exercise the powers and jurisdiction under the Delhi Police Establishment Act, 1946 in the State of Maharashtra. According to Shri Nankani, had such order dated October 21, 2020 not been in existence, Shri Param Bir could have approached the CBI for investigation; however, in view of such withdrawal, remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution is the only course open to him.” 17. It is seen that the consent was accorded by the Government of Maharashtra vide Government Order of the Home Department dated 22.02.1989. It is seen that the consent was accorded by the Government of Maharashtra vide Government Order of the Home Department dated 22.02.1989. It is seen that the consent was withdrawn by order dated 21.10.2020 by the Home Department, Government Of Maharashtra. It is seen that the order issued on 22.02.1989 was in force till 21.10.2020. This crime was detected in March, 2001. It is, therefore, apparent that this order was in force at the time of commission of the offence. As per this order, the consent was accorded by the Government of Maharashtra to the CBI, which functions under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, to conduct investigation in the State of Maharashtra. Therefore, on both the counts the objection cannot be sustained. 18. Before proceeding to consider merits of the submissions, it would be necessary at the outset to consider the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Jagmohan (supra). In this case, the Hon’ble Apex Court has considered the issue of scope of revisional power of the High Court. It is held that in exercise of revisional power, the High Court cannot undertake in-depth and minute re-examination of entire evidence and upset the concurrent findings of the trial Court and the first Appellate Court. It is further held that the powers of the High Court conferred under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is with the limited purpose and the same cannot be exercised as second appellate power. In order to appreciate the rival submissions, this settled legal position is required to be borne in mind. 19. I have perused the judgment and order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate as well as the learned Additional Sessions Judge in exercise of the appellate power. The Courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact. The Courts below have found that despite searching cross-examination of the witnesses and some favourable admissions given by them, the very core and crux of the case of the CBI has not been dented or shaken. The Courts below have found that oral evidence has been corroborated by the contemporaneous documentary evidence. The Courts below have found that despite searching cross-examination of the witnesses and some favourable admissions given by them, the very core and crux of the case of the CBI has not been dented or shaken. The Courts below have found that oral evidence has been corroborated by the contemporaneous documentary evidence. The Courts below have recorded a finding that the opinion and the report of the expert is the final nail in coffin of the accused, where it has been stated that the skin was of tiger and the other articles were wild animal products. 20. The Act of 1972 was enacted to provide for conservation, protection and management of wild life and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto with a view to ensuring the ecological and environmental security of the country. It was noticed that there was rapid decline in wild animals and birds, which is one of the most richest and most varied in the world, has been a cause of grave concern. Some wild animals and birds have already become extinct in this country and others are in the danger of being so. The Act provides guidelines for the protection, conservation and management of the wildlife in India. The Act covers all matters relating to India’s wildlife including protected areas, activities within protected areas, control of hunting and poaching, trade of wildlife, enforcement and administrative functions of wildlife authorities. The Act provides almost complete or partial protection of wild species listed under various Schedules. Specific threat to certain animals are related to large economic benefits. Skin and bones from tigers, ivory from elephants, horns from rhinos and the perfume from the musk deer are extensively used abroad. Bears are killed for their gall bladders. Corals and shells are also collected for export or sold on the beaches. A variety of wild plants with real or at times dubious medicinal value are being over harvested. The main object of the Act of 1972 is to conserve our incredible wildlife for future generations. It is seen that despite having stringent laws, the grid of a man could not be resisted. The killing of animals and extraction of their body parts for personal gain appears to be a common phenomenon. The main object of the Act of 1972 is to conserve our incredible wildlife for future generations. It is seen that despite having stringent laws, the grid of a man could not be resisted. The killing of animals and extraction of their body parts for personal gain appears to be a common phenomenon. It is true that in the advent of the enactment of this Act, the activities of killing of wild animals and theft of their body parts has been curbed to a large extent. However, of and on, the incidents of killing wild animals come to fore and ultimately taken to the Court of law. It appears that this case seems to be one of those instances. 21. In this case, on the basis of the evidence, prosecution has established that one tiger skin, 23 kg tiger bones, 5 skulls weighing 2 kg 400 gms, antler horns weighing 1 kg 900 gms, 3 tiger teeth and 10 tiger claws were recovered and seized in this crime. By any standard, this quantity, could not be said to be a small quantity. One can conclude that it might have involved killing number of tigers and other wild animals. It is to be noted that whenever and wherever such crime comes to the fore, it has to be taken seriously and dealt with iron fist. It is to be noted that such crimes are committed by syndicate. Number of players are involved in such crimes. In this case, fortunately or unfortunately, only two persons could be nabbed by the CBI. This case is a classic example in the sense that the information from State of Maharashtra went to New Delhi and from New Delhi, the CBI officers came to Maharashtra and apprehended the accused and recovered huge quantity of wild animal parts and products. This may not be understood as an attempt to blame and belittle the law enforcement agencies in the State of Maharashtra. However, the facts on record are so stark and glaring to warrant the comment. The Courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact that huge quantity of wild animal products/parts was recovered on the outskirt of city of Nagpur. It is to be noted that the offence was committed under the nose of the Forest and Police Department. However, the facts on record are so stark and glaring to warrant the comment. The Courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact that huge quantity of wild animal products/parts was recovered on the outskirt of city of Nagpur. It is to be noted that the offence was committed under the nose of the Forest and Police Department. The Police and Forest Department being working at ground level in the State of Maharashtra, were therefore, expected to smell the rat. In the above context, it needs to be stated that due diligence displayed by the CBI and the sincere efforts of the CBI officers led to unearth the serious crime, which ultimately culminated in arrest of the culprits and recovery of wild animal products/parts. 22. In this case, the star witnesses of the prosecution are PW1 and PW2. Their evidence has been criticized by learned advocates for the accused on the ground that they were not present on the spot and they signed on the documents, which were already prepared by the CBI officials. In order to justify this submission, reliance has been placed on certain admissions given by these witnesses in their cross-examination. It has come on record in the evidence of panch witnesses as well as in the evidence of CBI officials that after conducting raid, there was helter-skelter at the petrol pump. In his evidence, PW1 Rambhau Khute has stated that in the helter-skelter, the CBI officials chased four persons and nabbed them. He has stated that out of four persons, two were detained and two were allowed to go after enquiry. Learned Additional Sessions Judge as well as learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, have considered this aspect in great detail. I concur with the observation made by the Courts below that this witness might have fumbled in the cross-examination and given such an admission. On perusal of his evidence, I am satisfied that this observation is factually correct. It is not the case of the prosecution that CBI officials saw Maruti Esteem car coming to the petrol pump and being parked in the premises of the petrol pump. It is the case of CBI that the informer told PW4 that Maruti car was parked in the premises of the petrol pump and the accused persons with the articles were present in the said car. It is the case of CBI that the informer told PW4 that Maruti car was parked in the premises of the petrol pump and the accused persons with the articles were present in the said car. CBI officials surrounded the said car and they apprehended the accused and seized the articles. It is the defence of accused no.2 that he had come there half an hour before the actual helter-skelter occurred on the spot and in the commotion he was nabbed by the CBI officer and these articles were foisted in his name. Even if this answer given by PW1 is accepted as it is, it would not support the case of accused no.2. PW1 has not stated that accused no.2 was with him for half an hour till the actual culprits were nabbed. The possibility of accused no.2 coming and occupying back seat of the car cannot be ruled out. It is the case of CBI that the accused had come to the petrol pump to handover the articles to some unknown persons. This case appears to be probable because there was no reason for them to halt their car at the petrol pump. Ordinarily, at the petrol pump, after filling petrol, the vehicles leave the petrol pump. Therefore, this admission instead of supporting the accused, supports the CBI. Accused no.2 by this very admission and the evidence of defence witness examined by him, has admitted his presence on the spot on the given date and at given time. The question is whether accused no.2 was one of the occupants of the car having custody of all those articles or not. In my view, evidence of PW1, PW2, PW4 and other CBI officials, who were part of the raiding team, is sufficient to conclude that accused nos.1 and 2, on interception of the car, were found inside the car with all the articles. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate as well as learned Additional Sessions Judge have made a threadbare analysis of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and on doing so found the said evidence worth credible. The evidence, in my view, is cogent, concrete and reliable. 23. PW1 and PW2 are the independent witnesses. Despite searching cross-examination, the core and crux of their evidence as to the main incident has not been shaken and dented in any manner. The evidence, in my view, is cogent, concrete and reliable. 23. PW1 and PW2 are the independent witnesses. Despite searching cross-examination, the core and crux of their evidence as to the main incident has not been shaken and dented in any manner. It is not out of place to mention that every person does not possess photogenic memory. With the passage of time, the memory fades. The raid was conducted in March, 2001. The evidence of the panch witnesses was recorded in the month of January and March, 2006. It, therefore, appears that after almost 5 years of the incident, they deposed before the Court. Elaborate narration of the incident, involvement of the accused and seizure of huge quantity of wild animal products/parts by these witnesses is the prime factor to establish their presence on the spot for the purpose of raid. It is to be noted that if they were not part of the actual raid, apprehension of the accused and recovery of the articles, it would have been very difficult for them to place before the Court the account of the incident in this manner only with their imagination. In my view, therefore, evidence of these two independent witnesses carries greater value and weight. Therefore, I do not see any reason to take a different view than one taken by the Courts below. 24. PW4 A.K.Bassi was the in-charge of the raiding party. He has deposed about the information received in CBI office at New Delhi by the source/informer. In his evidence, in great detail, he has narrated the steps taken by him with his companion officers to work out the information. His evidence on apprehension of the accused and recovery of tiger skin and other wild animal products/parts is unshaken. It is to be noted that PW4 had no grudge or reason to falsely implicate the accused. In order to implicate any person in such crime, the officer must possess the articles of this kind with him. Unless and until recovery of such articles happens, false implication is not possible. After recovery of such huge quantity of wild animal parts, the only possibility that has to be ruled out is planting such articles in the name of innocent person by giving leeway to the real culprits. In this case, this possibility has been completely ruled out on the basis of the evidence. After recovery of such huge quantity of wild animal parts, the only possibility that has to be ruled out is planting such articles in the name of innocent person by giving leeway to the real culprits. In this case, this possibility has been completely ruled out on the basis of the evidence. It is true that in the evidence of the Investigating Officer (PW13), it has come on record that during interrogation, accused no.1 had informed him that he had procured the tiger skin from one Madhu. PW13 has stated that he conducted necessary investigation from that angle, but he could not trace out said Madhu. It is to be noted that on being confronted with such a serious crime, the accused is bound to give some explanation or the other. In some cases, it may be true and in some cases it may not be true. If it is not true, then the possibility of working out such an information becomes next to impossible. It appears that same thing has happened in this case. It is not the defence of the accused spelt out from statement under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. that some other persons had accompanied them for commission of a crime and on apprehension of those persons by the police on the spot, they were allowed to go scot free. A passing reference has been made by PW1 in his evidence on this aspect, however for the reasons recorded by me above, the same has not been found to be supported by the other evidence and contemporaneous documents. 25. PW6 Inspector Jagdishprasad was with PW4 on 17.03.2001 to assist him. He was part of the raiding team. His evidence is consistent with the evidence of PW4 and independent panch witnesses. 26. PW5 is the Malkhana in-charge where all the articles were deposited by PW4. Exh.39 is the extract of the malkhana register. PW5 has deposed that he received the parcels in sealed condition. This fact has been supported by the contemporaneous document in the form of entry in the register. He has deposed that he handed over custody of the articles to PW3 for being carried to Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun. Evidence of PW3 and contemporaneous entry in the register fortifies this contention of PW5. 27. This fact has been supported by the contemporaneous document in the form of entry in the register. He has deposed that he handed over custody of the articles to PW3 for being carried to Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun. Evidence of PW3 and contemporaneous entry in the register fortifies this contention of PW5. 27. PW10 Nisar Ahmed, a police constable attached to CBI, was deputed to collect the case property from Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. He collected the said case property and handed over the same to the Mahkhana in-charge (PW5). The extract of the register reflects the entry to this effect. There is an entry in the Malkhana register about production of the muddemal in the Court at the time of the evidence. Evidence of Malkhana in-charge is corroborated by contemporaneous documents. His evidence is sufficient to conclude that the articles had been received by him in sealed condition. He has stated that when he handed over the muddemal to PW3, the same were in sealed condition. PW3, who is the carrier of the articles to the Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, has corroborated the evidence of Malkhana in-charge. He has stated that he obtained custody of the muddemal from Malkhana. The articles were in sealed condition and in the same condition he handed over the articles in the office of Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. PW4 has deposed that after analysis of the articles, he was directed to go to the Institute at Dehradun to collect the packets. He has stated that the in-charge of the Institute handed over the packets in sealed condition. He has stated that thereafter he deposited the articles in sealed condition with the Malkhana In-charge. Evidence of these witnesses corroborate each other’s testimony on the relevant aspects with regard to the sealed condition of the samples, carrying of the samples to the Institute at Dehradun and return of the samples in sealed condition from the Institute at Dehradun. It is, therefore, seen that even the possibility of tampering with the sample packets and the articles has been completely ruled out. 28. PW7 Chandraprakash Sharma, at the relevant time was working as Laboratory Technician in Wild Life Forensic Cell of Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun. He has stated that he is Post Graduate in Forensic Science and doing the work of identification and analysis of wildlife animal articles. 28. PW7 Chandraprakash Sharma, at the relevant time was working as Laboratory Technician in Wild Life Forensic Cell of Wild Life Institute of India, Dehradun. He has stated that he is Post Graduate in Forensic Science and doing the work of identification and analysis of wildlife animal articles. Exh.30 is the acknowledgment from the office of Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun on receipt of the articles. PW7 has stated that the packets were handed over to him for analysis in sealed condition. The seals were proper and found intact. He has stated that he has personally opened the packets one by one and found the articles described on the cover. He has stated that on conducting the analysis, microscopic hair characteristics from the hair of the skin matched with the reference sample. He has stated that he found that sample skin hair characteristics matched with reference tiger hair. PW7 on analysis found that tiger claws were also matching with the reference sample. He has stated that on analysis, he found that the skin and 10 claws were of tiger (Panthera Tigress). He has deposed that thereafter the report was prepared. One report is at Exh.47 with regard to the skin and 10 claws. He has stated that he analyzed the sample from packet no.2. On analysis, he found that the bones were of tiger and leopard. The skulls were of Hyena, leopard, tiger and sloth bear. He has stated that the articles from packet no.5 were the antler hornes of Chital and Sambar. The report to that effect is at Exh.48. An attempt has been made in the cross-examination of this witness to suggest that with passage of time, such articles gets putrefied and therefore, does not remain fit for analysis. He has stated that if the property is not properly preserved, then the same gets putrefied and eventually it may not give desired result. The witness has made a voluntary statement and stated that in the present case, the property consisted of hard tissues and therefore, there was no possibility of the same getting putrefied easily. In this case, within four months from the seizure, the property was sent to the office of Wildlife Institute at Dehradun for analysis. It was in sealed condition. There is no material to come to a conclusion that the sealed property was not preserved properly. In this case, within four months from the seizure, the property was sent to the office of Wildlife Institute at Dehradun for analysis. It was in sealed condition. There is no material to come to a conclusion that the sealed property was not preserved properly. On the basis of evidence of this witness, the case of the prosecution has been fully established viz-a-viz nature of the articles. 29. PW12 M.R. Sahani, Dy.S.P. is the complainant. On the basis of the material collected during the course of investigation, he filed the complaint in the Court of law. He was authorized, for the reasons stated above, to file the complaint. 30. P.W.13 Shekhar Bajaj is the Investigating Officer. He has stated that his investigation revealed commission of the offences punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 49, 49-B and 56 of the Act of 1972. Evidence of the prosecution is consistent, cogent and reliable. I do not see any reason to discard and disbelieve the said evidence. Similarly, I do not see any reason to conclude that the Courts below have committed any error or mistake while appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution. The findings recorded are based on proper appreciation of the evidence. Therefore, the submission that the findings suffer from perversity is also without substance and merit. On consideration of the matter afresh, I do not see any reason to take a view different from the one taken concurrently by the Courts below. Therefore, I do not see any substance in the revision applications. 31. The next important aspect is with regard to the quantum of sentence. It is to be noted that learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was empowered to award the punishment. I have set out above the statement of object and reasons behind the enactment of the Act of 1972. Learned advocates for the accused prayed for leniency in the sentence. It is true that the incident had occurred in 2001. From the date of incident, near about 22 years have rolled by. It is true that the accused by this time must have moved forward in their life. The question is whether the case on hand warrants any leniency to either set aside or modify the substantive sentence. It is true that the incident had occurred in 2001. From the date of incident, near about 22 years have rolled by. It is true that the accused by this time must have moved forward in their life. The question is whether the case on hand warrants any leniency to either set aside or modify the substantive sentence. In my view, if the above stated observations are borne in mind, then in such cases, the Court has to take strict view in the matter of awarding sentence. The sentence awarded by the Court must be an example by way of deterrence for others. Unless and until strict view is taken and deterrent punishment commensurate with the seriousness of the offence is imposed, a message of fear psychosis could not reach to the society. In such crimes, the misplaced sympathy while awarding sentence can send a wrong message to the society that even after committing such gruesome crime, a person can be let off with a negligible punishment. In this case, the quantity of the wild animal products indicates that it involved killing of more than one animal. The tiger, which is the National Animal, once upon a time on the verge of extinction, was killed in this case. The deterrent punishment serves two fold purpose. Such deterrent punishment sends a message to the society at large as well as to the accused, who are found guilty in actual commission of crime, as to the consequences one could be visited with, after commission of such crime. In my view, therefore, this is not a fit case to show any sympathy to the accused. 32. I, therefore, conclude that the revisions deserve to be dismissed. The same are dismissed accordingly. A copy of the judgment be sent to learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur for execution of the order of conviction and sentence in accordance with law.