Voluntary disclosure immunity cannot be defeated by enforcement inquiry during the scheme's protected declaration window.

A time-bound voluntary disclosure scheme granting limited immunity for declarations made within six months was treated as a public policy measure meant to compile an inventory of exotic live species. The Court held that, during the protected period, directing enforcement authorities to inquire into the source of licit acquisition or possession of voluntarily declared stock would defeat the scheme's object and undermine the immunity expressly promised. The earlier ruling between the parties was treated as binding on the domestic possession and trade position, and no legal basis was found to compel action contrary to the scheme. The request for directions was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether directions could be issued to permit inquiry by enforcement authorities into the source of licit acquisition or possession of exotic live species declared under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme notwithstanding the immunity contemplated by the scheme.

Analysis: The scheme was introduced as a time-bound disclosure mechanism to compile an inventory of exotic live species and to grant a limited window of immunity from documentation requirements for declarations made within six months. The Court treated the scheme as a policy measure framed in wider public interest and held that, during the protected window, inquiry into the source of licit acquisition or possession of voluntarily declared stock would defeat the object of the scheme. The earlier decision between the parties was treated as binding on the domestic possession and trade position, and the Court found no legal basis to direct governmental agencies to act contrary to the immunity expressly promised under the scheme.

Conclusion: The request for directions was rejected, and no inquiry contrary to the scheme could be ordered during the six-month immunity period.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Government frames a time-bound voluntary disclosure scheme granting immunity for timely declarations, courts will not issue directions that nullify the promised immunity or frustrate the scheme's public policy object.

---