In a peculiar case that captivated the attention of wildlife enthusiasts and legal aficionados alike, the Karnataka High Court recently reached a verdict on the consumption of a disputed meat, suspected to be that of a deer. The court upheld the conviction of four accused individuals, known as Boothappa and Others, for attempting to consume what authorities believed to be deer meat. However, a surprising twist emerged during the proceedings, leaving many puzzled.

The accused had fervently argued that the meat in question was not from a deer but rather from a sheep. Their defense hinged on an intriguing line of reasoning put forth by Justice V Srishananda during the trial. The esteemed Justice raised a pertinent question: If the meat were truly that of a sheep, would there have been a need for the accused to bake it clandestinely in a desolate location over a campfire?

The prosecution, represented by the State of Karnataka, contended that the oral evidence of a veterinary expert conclusively established that the accused had hunted and killed two deer. The presence of half-cooked meat, the animal's head, and other bones further corroborated their claims. Additionally, the government argued that the head of the raiding party had no motive to falsely implicate the accused.

The court, taking into account the absence of animosity between the raiding party and the accused, ruled in favor of the prosecution. The judges acknowledged that while the meat's origin remained disputed, the accused's act of baking it in an isolated location with the aid of a lantern and campfire cast doubt on their claims of innocence. Consequently, the court upheld the conviction of Boothappa and his associates, finding them guilty of violating the Wild Life (Protection) Act.

However, displaying leniency due to the advanced age of the accused—ranging from their 60s to 70s—the court reduced their sentence to the time already served in jail. To mark the seriousness of the offense and deter future violations, a fine of ₹25,000 was imposed on each convicted individual.

This unusual case, with its tantalizing debate over the disputed meat's identity, serves as a reminder that even the most mundane aspects of daily life can lead to unexpected legal entanglements. The Karnataka High Court's ruling acts as a stern warning to those tempted to partake in illicit feasts, emphasizing that the consequences of such actions can be far-reaching and unexpected.

As Boothappa and his accomplices face the repercussions of their controversial feast, wildlife enthusiasts and legal enthusiasts alike continue to marvel at the enigmatic case of the mysterious meat that sealed their fate.

Case Title: Boothappa and Ors. vs The State of Karnataka| CRL. RP. No. 245 of 2020

Click Here To Read Judgment