T1 forensic reports only to give clean chit to shooters: NGO

Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of Bombay high court on Thursday allowed a Mumbai NGO to amend its PIL demanding a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the illegal killing of T1 tigress from Pandharkawda, which had allegedly killed 14 humans.
The Earth Brigade Foundation, through counsel Shreerang Bhandarkar, claimed that preliminary offence report (POR) of November 3 by the Forest Development Corporation of India (FDCM) into the killing of T1, popularly known as Avni, left out essential details. Even the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory’s (RFSL) ballistic report of January 25 had demonstrated inclination to give a clean chit to shooter Asgar and Shafaqat Ali, and exonerate them in the crime allegedly committed in collusion with forest officials, it said.
The petitioner also demanded addition of FDCM Nagpur, its assistant manager Vasant Charpe, RFSL, and principal chief conservator of forest AK Misra as new respondents in the PIL.
While allowing the amendment application, a division bench comprising justices Ravi Deshpande and Shreeram Modak issued notices to the newly added respondents, asking them to reply within six weeks.
The petitioner argued that reports of both, FDCM and RFSL, were vague, and don’t include names of offenders or any sections pertaining to offences committed. Highlighting absence of details, the NGO indicated FDCM and its manager were conspiring with the forest department to cover up the misdeeds of shooters.
It said the reports of the state’s investigation committee mentioned darting of the tigress was unauthorized, as the team was only permitted to identify her. Even the tranquillizing drugs were handled by unauthorized persons during the operation. After darting her, the gunshot was allegedly fired a few seconds later to kill her without giving the medicine time to take effect. Therefore, the petitioner argued that the intention of darting the animal is doubtful and that it was against standard operating procedures (SOP).
Earlier, Bhandarkar pointed out that Ali claimed he could not remember his gun’s specifications and despite repeated requests by the forest department to deposit the gun, he failed to do so. RFSL’s ballistic report mentioned that the fragments submitted for analysis were caused by rupture of the bullet against a hard object. However, he claimed no scientific methodology was used to match the fragments to the rifle and there are no photographs of this analysis to throw light on the report. He requested to examine the shooter’s role along with other members of the private team of hunters involved in the operation. He further contended that there might be further breach of Arms Rules 2016 at the behest of Asgar and Shafaqat Ali.
The criminal PIL prays for directives to state and NTCA to initiate criminal proceedings against private shooters for illegal hunting, tampering with evidence at the crime scene, and dereliction of duties under Section 9 of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Section 3 of Arms Act, 1959, Section 30 of Narcotic and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
(With inputs from Samidha Raut)