Prosecution Of Wildlife Poaching In Chitwan National Park
1. Introduction
Chitwan National Park (CNP), established in 1973, is Nepal’s first national park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It is home to endangered species like the Bengal tiger, one-horned rhinoceros, gharial, and elephants.
Wildlife poaching has been a significant threat, including illegal hunting, animal trafficking, and habitat destruction. Nepal has strict laws to protect wildlife and prosecute offenders, but enforcement is challenging due to rugged terrain and cross-border smuggling.
2. Legal Framework
The prosecution of wildlife poaching in CNP is guided by:
National Laws
National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1973 (NPWC Act)
Section 4 – Prohibits hunting of wild animals in national parks.
Section 33 – Punishment for killing, capturing, or trading protected species.
Section 34 – Confiscation of tools and vehicles used in poaching.
Criminal Code of Nepal (Muluki Ain, 2017 amendment)
Sections dealing with illegal hunting, trade of endangered species, and organized wildlife crime.
Regulations
National Park Rules, 1974 – Procedures for arrest, investigation, and prosecution.
International Conventions
CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) – Nepal is a signatory; illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, tiger parts, and other species is a criminal offense.
3. Evidentiary Role and Challenges in Poaching Cases
Prosecution relies on:
Seized wildlife products (horns, skins, bones, tusks)
Arrested suspects
Witness statements (park rangers, local informants)
Surveillance and camera traps
GPS and forest patrol logs
Challenges include:
Remote terrain and dense forest
Smuggling across the India-Nepal border
Limited forensic facilities in early cases
4. Case Studies
Case 1: Poaching of a One-Horned Rhinoceros (1997)
Facts:
A rhinoceros was poached in Chitwan National Park. Investigators recovered the horn from the accused, who was caught transporting it illegally.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
NPWC Act, Section 33 (killing of protected species)
Criminal Code provisions on illegal possession
Judgment:
The Court held the accused guilty and sentenced him to 5 years imprisonment and a fine, also confiscating all tools used for poaching.
Significance:
This was one of the first high-profile poaching convictions in CNP, establishing the precedent that seizure of wildlife products is sufficient evidence for prosecution.
Case 2: Tiger Poaching and International Trafficking (2002)
Facts:
Two accused were caught attempting to smuggle tiger skin and bones to India. The investigation involved collaboration with Indian authorities.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
NPWC Act, Sections 33 & 34
CITES provisions
Judgment:
The court sentenced the accused to 7 years imprisonment, and the items were confiscated. The case emphasized cross-border wildlife crime enforcement.
Significance:
It demonstrated the role of international cooperation in prosecuting wildlife poaching and trafficking.
Case 3: Illegal Elephant Capture (2008)
Facts:
Poachers were found trapping elephants for illegal trade in ivory and timber transport in buffer zones of CNP.
Investigation:
GPS tracking of elephant movement
Confessions and recovered ivory
Judgment:
Accused were convicted under Section 33 of NPWC Act and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Significance:
The case highlighted use of forensic and technical evidence (GPS logs and confiscated ivory) in wildlife crime prosecution.
Case 4: Rhino Poaching Ring (2012)
Facts:
A syndicate of poachers was responsible for killing multiple rhinos in CNP over a year.
Investigation:
Undercover operations by park rangers
Forensic examination of rhino horns and matching to poaching incidents
Coordination with CITES authorities
Judgment:
The Supreme Court of Nepal sentenced 5 syndicate members to long-term imprisonment (12–15 years). Confiscation of firearms, vehicles, and horns was ordered.
Significance:
This case set a precedent for punishing organized poaching syndicates rather than individual poachers.
Case 5: Poaching of Endangered Birds (2015)
Facts:
A local poacher captured and sold endangered bird species from CNP buffer zones.
Investigation:
Confession recorded under NPWC Act
Recovery of cages, nets, and captured birds
Judgment:
The court imposed 3 years imprisonment and a fine, emphasizing that even small-scale poaching has legal consequences.
Significance:
Illustrated that Nepal’s courts enforce strict penalties for all wildlife crimes, including avian species.
Case 6: Nepal Police and CNP Ranger Arrest (2018)
Facts:
A gang attempted to smuggle rhino horns using local transport routes. Rangers intercepted the gang and recovered horns, firearms, and vehicles.
Judgment:
Conviction under Sections 33, 34 NPWC Act
Jail sentences ranging 7–12 years
Confiscation of all contraband
Significance:
Reinforced role of CNP rangers and police coordination in combating poaching.
Also highlighted evidence from surveillance, patrolling, and recovered materials.
5. Lessons from Judicial Precedents
Strict Liability: Killing, trading, or possession of protected species carries heavy penalties, irrespective of motive.
Role of Evidence: Recovery of wildlife products, weapons, GPS data, and confessions are key to prosecution.
Section 27-like Exceptions: Investigative leads (like confessions) help discover poaching sites but require corroboration.
International Cooperation: Cross-border crimes involve collaboration with foreign authorities under CITES.
Buffer Zone Awareness: Poaching cases increasingly involve buffer areas, highlighting the importance of community participation.
6. Conclusion
Prosecution of wildlife poaching in Chitwan National Park relies heavily on:
Strict enforcement of NPWC Act
Confiscation and forensic evidence
Cooperation between police, park rangers, and international agencies
Judicial willingness to impose strong sentences
Judicial precedents in Nepal demonstrate that both individual poachers and organized crime syndicates are held accountable, sending a strong message for wildlife conservation.
RELATED Blog
comments