Times of India: Nagpur: Thursday,
April 24, 2014.
On May 18,
2012, forest department officials said they found a tiger in Borda near
Chandrapur butchered into 11 pieces. Three months later, in September, Durgapur
police arrested four local poachers from Jambharla village and seized four
tiger claws along with 18 whiskers. Forest department claimed quoting Centre
for Cellular & Molecular Biology (CCMB), Hyderabad, report that these were
from the tiger killed at Borda. At the time, the Hyderabad could not identify
even the sex of tiger from the samples seized from poachers.
From the
information received recently by city RTI activist Avinash Prabhune, it can be
inferred that Jambharla tiger might be another individual and samples of Borda
tiger might have been sent twice by forest officials, ostensibly to calm down
the furore over frequent poaching incidents then. Otherwise, how could it
happen that CCMB failed to establish identity from seven samples of Jambharla
tiger sent by police and animal husbandry departments, but identified it
through one sample sent by the forest department?
RTI reveals
that 86 tiger part samples were sent by the forest officials in the last two
years. These samples related to 16 tigers that includes four males, four
females and eight unidentified. Though officially, more than 20 tigers have
died in the state during the period.
An analysis
of the information shows that on May 25, 2012, samples sent to CCMB by deputy
conservator of Chandrapur showed Borda tiger to be a male. On September 17,
police arrested four poachers with tiger claws and later recovered bones from
forest near Jambharla. Then investigating officer (IO) ND Kursange, now posted
in Nagpur, says, "In Jambharla case, we had sent some samples to CCMB
after collecting it from the Durgapur police. We doubted that the parts found
in Jambharla were that of Borda tiger. DNA report pointed out that Borda and
Jambharla samples were of one male."
Shockingly,
when Kursange was told that Jambharla samples sent by police had failed to
establish tiger identity, he said, "This may be because police sent the
samples to a Kolkata-based research laboratory." He was perplexed when
told that police too sent the samples to CCMB. "If this is true then there
is complete contradiction. Poaching of two tigers cannot be ruled out, but I
can't say anything now," he said.
Interestingly,
then investigating officer deputy SP SN Sheikh says, "In October, we had
sent at least six samples of Jambharla tiger to CCMB. Now that I have been
transferred to Buldhana, I don't know the result." He too was surprised
over the mismatch. CCMB report also reveals that assistant commissioner of
animal husbandry polyclinic at Chandrapur sent one sample to CCMB. A report
sent to both police and polyclinic on January 2, 2014, says CCMB could not
establish identity of individual/sex due to insufficient DNA.
"If the
CCMB could determine sex of the animal from just one sample sent by Chandrapur
DyCF on September 17 (probably Jambharla bones seized by the police), why could
it not ascertain the same from six samples sent by the police. The reason is
simple. The samples sent by DyCF must have been parts of the Borda tiger itself
and not Jambharla at all," alleged Prabhune.
TWIST IN
THE TALE
· On
May 18, 2012 a tiger carcass was found butchered into 11 pieces in Borda, 13km
from Chandrapur
· In
September, police arrested four persons with tiger claws and whiskers and also
seized tiger body parts from Jambharla in Chandrapur
· Forest
officials collected these samples from police and sent to CCMB, which said they
were from one individual male
·
Police
and animal husbandry departments too sent Jambharla samples to CCMB but the
centre failed to identify the individual and its sex
· Samples
sent by forest department could be parts of Borda tiger and not Jambharla.
Hence the mismatch in results
· Interestingly,
date of report sent by CCMB for both May and September samples is stated as
November 1, 2012. How is it possible?