Mohanlal’s possession of ivory artefacts may result in another wildlife crime case

The illegal possession of ivory artefacts by actor Mohanlal may be booked as a fresh wildlife crime case against him or appended to the existing one on the illegal possession of elephant tusks, with the Kerala High Court recently striking down the ownership certificates issued to both the tusks and artefacts, say legal experts.

The illegal possession of 13 artefacts and tusks surfaced following an Income Tax raid at his Kochi residence on July 22, 2011. The artefacts included ivory carvings of Gaja Lakshmi, Geethopadesham, Krishnaleela, Tirupati Balaji, Dhanalakshmi, Devi, Dashavatharam, and Ganapathy of sizes measuring up to 60 cm.

Though the details of the artefacts were mentioned in the inventory prepared by the IT department after the raid and another one prepared by the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Social Forestry Division, Ernakulam, no case was booked against Mr. Mohanlal for their possession. The case booked against the actor at the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court 3, Perumbavoor, was only for the possession of four elephant tusks. The illegal possession of the ivory artefacts also constitutes an offence under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Forest officials said.

Violation of Wildlife Act

The actor committed the crime of “illegal transfer and possession of the tusks of the Schedule 1 (12 B) wild animal, Elephant (elephant maximus) in violation of the Wildlife Protection Act,” noted the chargesheet.

He was also accused of the “possession of the elephant tusks, transferring the same, bought and kept in custody without informing the same to the government and without obtaining the permission of the Chief Wildlife Warden and thereby violating the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972,” according to the chargesheet.

“If the ivory and the artefacts came into the possession of the actor at different points of time, two separate cases may have to be booked. However, the department can append the case of artefacts to the ivory if it came into his possession in a single transaction. If the points of possession of the artefacts and the tusks are not traceable, one case would be enough,” pointed out judicial sources.

The department has left the tusks, which were fitted on mirror tables, and the artefacts in the custody of the actor.

A Division Bench of the court consisting of Justices A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Jobin Sebastian had last month struck down the ownership certificates issued for both the ivory and the artefacts after finding them “void ab initio and legally unenforceable.”

The State government will soon take a call on the court order cancelling the ownership certificates of both the ivory and the artefacts. The department will decide on the future course of action after the State government makes up its mind on the court verdict, said a top functionary of the department.