Attempt to consume deer meat: Karnataka High Court upholds conviction of four accused but reduces jail term

The Karnataka High Court recently upheld the conviction of four men accused of attempting to consume deer meat but reduced their sentence to the jail time already served by them [Boothappa and Ors. vs The State of Karnataka]..Regarding the dispute over whether or not the meat recovered was actually a deer's, Justice V Srishananda said that if the meat was of a sheep, the accused need not have baked it in a desolate place over a camp fire.."Only with regard to seized half-baked meat, there is some dispute. If it is a meat of a sheep, there was no necessity for the revision petitioners to bake it in a lonely place that too with the help of lantern and camp fire," the Court said. .The Court was hearing an appeal by the four accused challenging their conviction under Sections 2(16)(b), (c), (35)(36) read with Sections 9 , 39, 50 punishable under section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act. They were sentenced to three years of simple imprisonment by the trial court. .As per the chargesheet, forest officials were informed by some sources that some people had killed an animal and were planning to consume it in a secluded place. Allegedly, after the officials raided they place, they found half cooked meat, the head of the animal, and some other bones.Accordingly, a trial magistrate convicted them for the offences. The order was upheld by a district court as well. Hence, the accused moved the High Court..The accused contended that the prosecution's case was hollow as the framing of the charges by the court below was improper and therefore the entire trial stood vitiated.Alternatively, it was contended sentence modification would be proper considering the age of the accused and the fact that they were first time offenders..On the other hand, the State supported the District Court order by contending that the oral evidence of the veterinary expert was enough to establish that the accused had killed two deer. Thus, it sought dismissal of the petition.The Government Pleader also underlined that the head of the raiding party had no animosity against the accused to implicate them falsely. He also contended that seizure of the half-baked meat and other material clearly indicated that the accused had tried to cook the meat.Regarding the alternative suggestion, the State contended that the offences were serious and any leniency would send the wrong message to the public. Therefore, it sought dismissal of the petition..The Court agreed that the head of the raiding party had no reason to falsely implicate the accused. Further, it stated that the petitioners' submission that the veterinary expert could not issue a certificate with respect to an animal always found in the wild, indicated that they accepted the incident.It said that the dispute was regarding only whether the meat was a deer's. In that regard, the Court said there was no necessity for the accused to bake it in a lonely place over a camp fire.Hence, it concluded that the accused were rightly convicted and upheld the order of the trial court. However, considering that the accused were in their 60s and 70s, the Court reduced their sentence to jail time already undergone and imposed a fine of ₹25,000 each..The petitioners were represented by advocates PB Umesh and RB Deshpande.The State was represented by High Court Government Pleader (HCGP) K Nageshwarappa..[Read Order]