New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) under the chairmanship of retired apex court judge Justice Jasti Chelameswar to probe into alleged illegal wildlife transfers, the unlawful captivity of elephants and other allegations against the Vantara wildlife facility in Gujarat’s Jamnagar.
A Bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale was dealing with two public interest litigations (PILs) that levelled wide-ranging accusations, not only against Vantara but also casting aspersions on statutory authorities and even courts. Ordinarily, such pleas “warrant dismissal in limine”, observed the Justice Mithal-led Bench.
However, noting allegations that statutory authorities and even courts were unwilling or incapable of discharging their mandate — particularly in the absence of verified facts — the apex court said it was appropriate “in the ends of justice to call for an independent factual appraisal which may establish the violation, as alleged, if any.”
Apart from retired Supreme Court judge Justice Jasti Chelameswar, the SIT comprises former Chief Justice of Uttarakhand and Telangana High Courts Justice Raghavendra Chauhan, former Mumbai Police Commissioner Hemant Nagrale, and senior IRS officer Anish Gupta as members.
As per the top court’s order, the SIT has been tasked to examine issues including acquisition of animals from India and abroad, particularly elephants; compliance with the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972; International Convention on Trade of Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES) obligations; standards of veterinary care and animal welfare; allegations of creating a vanity or private collection; misuse of water or carbon credits; and allegations of financial irregularities and money laundering.
The Justice Mithal-led Bench clarified that the exercise is “only to assist the Court as a fact-finding inquiry” and “shall not be construed to have cast any doubt on the functioning of any statutory authorities or the private respondent-Vantara.”
“This order neither expresses any opinion on the allegations made in the petitions nor this order be construed to have cast any doubt on the functioning of any of the statutory authorities or the private respondent Vantara,” it said. Asking the SIT to submit its report by September 12, the Supreme Court said the two PILs will be listed on September 15 to consider the SIT findings.
The PILs were filed just days after thousands of residents in Maharashtra’s Kolhapur staged protests against Vantara, an animal rescue and rehabilitation centre managed by Anant Ambani—son of industrialist Mukesh Ambani—and supported by Reliance Industries Limited and the Reliance Foundation. The demonstrators called for the return of a 36-year-old elephant named Mahadevi, also known as Madhuri, to her original home in Nandani village in the Karvir region of Kolhapur district.
In July, Madhuri was transferred to Vantara in compliance with a Supreme Court order. The petitioner-in-person, advocate C.R. Jaya Sukin, urged the apex court to constitute a Supreme Court-monitored committee to investigate the alleged illegalities surrounding Vantara’s operations, ensure the return of all captive elephants to their rightful owners, rescue wild animals and birds, and declare the high-powered committee constituted by the Tripura High Court as unconstitutional.
The plea alleged that these elephants were moved to Vantara without legal clearance, in violation of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, and in contempt of previous Supreme Court orders. It said, “Central Zoo Authority confirmed Vantara do not have 38H clearance on 21.10.2022, all of the Elephants and Wildlife moved to Vantara, Jamnagar, Gujarat, is in contravention of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972 and Vantara being contempt of the apex court order.”
The plea further alleged that elephants were forcibly taken from temples and private owners by an NGO in collusion with state forest departments and the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), under the pretext of preventing cruelty. Moreover, the PIL alleged that several endangered animals were “smuggled” into Vantara, not only from India but also internationally.
As per the petition, these transfers allegedly took place under the guise of rescue and rehabilitation but “may have been traded for commercial purposes rather than genuine conservation efforts”. It added that multiple channels fed animals into Vantara: private entities like the Madras Crocodile Bank Trust in Tamil Nadu, the Association for the Conservation of Threatened Parrots in Germany, and Mexico’s Fauna Zoo; state-owned zoos like Sakkarbaug Zoo and Assam State Zoo; and state forest departments dealing with human-animal conflicts.
In an official statement, Vantara had said the decision to relocate Madhuri was made under judicial authority, and its role was limited to providing care, veterinary support, and housing as an independent rescue and rehabilitation centre. “At no stage did Vantara initiate or recommend the relocation, nor was there any intent to interfere with religious practice or sentiment,” the statement added.
(IANS)
