Action initiated against Kannada filmstars, godmen for wearing tiger claw pendants

Authorities in Karnataka have initiated action against four Kannada film actors and two self-proclaimed godmen who have openly flouted the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 by wearing tiger claw lockets around their necks.

Actors Darshan Thoogudeepa, Nikhil Kumaraswamy, Jaggesh, Varthur Santhosh, and godmen Vinay Guruji and Dhananjay Guruji have been spotted weaing tiger claw pendants. Vinay Guruji also uses a tiger pelt to cover his chair whenever he sits down.

Santhosh, who is a contestant in the Kannada Bigg Boss reality show, was picked up by Forest Department sleuths for questioning from the Bigg Boss Studio in Bengaluru city on the night of October 23, 2023.

The first complaint in the matter was lodged by a whistleblower, Shivakumar.

According to a direction given by the Government of Karnataka’s additional chief secretary, Javed Akhtar, “These are definitely incidences of violations of the Wild Life (Protection) Act of 1972, which are punishable with severe fines, coupled with a jail term. The department must take immediate and definite action against the individuals who wear tiger claw pendants. It does not matter how big or how influential the person is.”

Following the directions, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest has passed orders to take action against the violators.

Prakash Natalkar, former senior forest official (wildlife), told Down To Earth (DTE):

It is definitely a violation of provisions of the Wild Life (Protection) Act of 1972. Awareness levels among people about this type of crime appears to be very low, even among celebrities, which is deplorable. The Wildlife Act is as prevalent as the Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure, and nobody claims ignorance of the law as an escape route.

He added, though, that the genuineness of the item had to be ascertained by officials before taking forward the case.

“It is a foregone conclusion that celebrities may not use fake items due to their financial power. Harvesting body parts of a tiger or any wild animal for vanity, whether from the carcass of the animal or hunting it for wildlife trade, is treated equally under the law,” Natalkar added.

Wildlife conservation law expert, Praveen Bhargava, insisted that illegal wildlife trade should be destroyed at its roots.

“It is not sufficient to investigate the end user of the trade. The investigating agencies must trace out the incidences of hunting wildlife for commercial gains, harvesting the body parts of the wild animals, processing them, transporting them, and trading them. There is a wide array of activities that happen behind the scenes and have to be established by the investigating agencies,” he told DTE.

Bhargava added that Section 39 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act of 1972, amended in 2022 (to the extent of fines and imprisonment), had very serious implications.

“The imprisonment can be three years minimum, extendable up to seven years, and a fine of Rs 25,000. If body parts like pelts, claws, or, for that matter, even a single strand or hair is harvested from the carcass of an animal or from an animal hunted down for harvesting of body parts, the amount of fine levied is similar,” he explained.

The burden of proof falls on the defendant and not the prosecution. The defendant has to prove that s/he is not in possession of a wildlife item, according to Bhargava. 

Subscribe to Daily Newsletter :

SUPPORT US

We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.