Family to pay Rs 50L for not producing 100 kg ivory articles

A Delhi court has upheld the order of a magisterial court imposing a penalty of Rs 50 lakh on a family, facing proceedings in a wildlife case, for failing to produce over 100 kg of ivory articles before it.
Special CBI Judge J P S Malik, while upholding the January 2014 order of the trial court, also allowed the Wildlife inspector to adduce evidence estimating the market price of the property (ivory articles) during the trial, so that the remaining amount may be recovered from the accused persons for causing alleged disappearance of the items.
The sessions court was hearing an appeal filed by Delhi residents, R K Jain, his wife Sarita and mother Sushila against a trial court order directing them to pay Rs 50 lakh for failing to produce before it the large quantity of ivory articles, allegedly recovered from their residence in 1999.

"The impugned order passed by trial court in the matter suffers from no legal infirmity or illegality, as the trial court was left with the only option to ensure the production of the case property (ivory) before it to facilitate the continuation of the proceedings in the matter," the special judge said.
The family had told the court that in May 1999, a debt recovery officer had visited Jain's house in Darya Ganj here to carry out attachment proceedings as his father was part of a firm which had failed to repay credit facilities to a bank.
During the visit, the officer had allegedly found ivory articles and seized them. Jains claimed it all happened in their absence and they denied having any such articles.

As per the complaint filed by the wildlife inspector, the articles were released to the family by the presiding officer of the debt recovery tribunal on 'Superdari'.

The inspector in his complaint alleged that the family members were in possession of ivory articles without licence.
As per the complaint, Sushila Jain was sent a memo asking her to produce the legal source of the ivory articles released to them and a licence to keep them, but she failed to reply.
It was also prayed in the complaint that the ivory articles involved in the case be produced before the court.

The appellants contended before the sessions court that they never possessed any such property and they had not received any ivory articles on 'Superdari'.
After the family members failed to produce the released ivory articles before it, the trial court had imposed Rs 50 lakh penalty on Jains.
The trial court had noted that in their application seeking quashing of the complaint in 2004, Jains had admitted their possession of the ivory articles having been received pursuant to the order of the debt recovery tribunal.