Supreme Court: After two writ petitions were filed under Article 32 of the Constitution in public interest, based exclusively on reports and stories published in newspapers, circulated on social media, and on various complaints submitted by non-governmental organizations and wildlife organizations, containing allegations against ‘Vantara’ (Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre) [respondent], operated by the Reliance Foundation in Jamnagar, Gujarat, the Division Bench comprising Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ. directed the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (‘SIT’) to inquire into the affairs of Vantara. The SIT, led by Former Supreme Court judge, Justice Jasti Chelameswar, has been tasked with examining, among other issues, the compliance with the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and other relevant statutory frameworks in relation to the acquisition of animals, particularly elephants, from both within India and abroad.
The petitions made wide-ranging accusations, including unlawful acquisition of animals from India and abroad, mistreatment of animals in captivity, financial irregularities, money laundering, and other serious concerns. These petitions were not confined to making allegations against Vantara but also cast aspersions upon statutory authorities such as the Central Zoo Authority, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (‘CITES’), as well as the Courts. In essence, the petitions sought to indict the aforementioned institutions solely based on media reports.
Upon a reading of the pleadings, the Court found that the petitions merely contained allegations without any material of probative value. There appeared to be no supporting evidence to substantiate the claims made. Given the sweeping nature of the allegations, the Court observed that inviting a counter from Vantara or any other party would serve little purpose. Ordinarily, a petition resting solely on such unverified and unsupported allegations does not merit consideration in law and warrants dismissal at the threshold.
However, in light of the serious nature of the allegations, particularly those questioning the willingness or ability of statutory authorities and even the Courts to discharge their mandated duties, the Court deemed it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to order an independent factual appraisal. This would help establish whether any violations, as alleged, had indeed occurred. Accordingly, the Court directed the constitution of an SIT comprising individuals of impeccable integrity, high repute, and extensive experience in public service.
In view of the foregoing, the Court constituted an SIT with the following members:
Chairperson:
i. Justice Jasti Chelameswar (Former Judge, Supreme Court of India)
Members:
ii. Justice Raghvendra S. Chauhan (Former Chief Justice, High Courts of Uttarakhand and Telangana)
iii. Mr. Hemant Nagrale, IPS (Former Commissioner of Police, Mumbai)
iv. Mr. Anish Gupta, IRS (Additional Commissioner, Customs)
The SIT has been tasked with conducting an independent and comprehensive factual appraisal and to submit a report addressing, inter alia, the following issues:
-
The acquisition of animals from India and abroad, with particular focus on elephants;
-
Compliance with the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the rules framed thereunder for zoos;
-
Compliance with CITES, along with applicable import/export laws and statutory requirements concerning the trade of live animals;
-
Adherence to standards of animal husbandry, veterinary care, animal welfare, and investigation into mortalities and their causes;
-
Complaints related to climatic conditions and the alleged unsuitability of the location near an industrial zone;
-
Allegations concerning the creation of a vanity or private collection, and issues involving breeding, conservation programmes, and use of biodiversity resources;
-
Complaints regarding misuse of water and carbon credits;
-
Allegations pertaining to violations of legal provisions, illegal trade in animals or animal articles, wildlife smuggling, as reported in the articles, stories, and complaints cited in the petitions and otherwise;
-
Complaints concerning issues of financial compliance, including allegations of money laundering;
-
Any other subject, issue, or matter germane to the allegations raised in the petitions.
The Court observed that the SIT, while preparing its report on the aforementioned issues, may call for and receive information from the petitioners, officials, regulators, intervenors, or any other individual, including journalists, who wish to have their allegations examined. The SIT has also been granted the liberty to inquire into any additional aspect it deems necessary to submit a comprehensive factual report to the Court.
Directions Issued by the Court:
(a) The SIT shall be fully assisted by the Central Zoo Authority, the CITES Management Authority, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and the State of Gujarat, including its Forest and Police Departments. All private persons and entities, including the private respondent, Vantara, are directed to extend full cooperation. Any instance of non-assistance or non-cooperation, whether brought to the notice of the Court or recorded in the SIT’s report, shall invite consideration for appropriate action, including the issuance of directions or proceedings for contempt.
(b) The respective departments to which the currently serving SIT members belong shall also provide necessary cooperation and support to the SIT in the discharge of its mandate.
(c) The Director General (Forests), Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, shall be responsible for facilitating all logistical arrangements for the SIT, including travel, lodging, and secretarial assistance.
(d) The SIT is permitted to seek expert assistance or opinion from any domain specialist of its choice, as necessary for the purpose of its inquiry.
(e) The SIT shall conduct a physical inspection and verification of the premises and facilities of Vantara. The Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Gujarat, shall ensure complete support and cooperation for the SIT’s activities within the state.
(f) Based on its findings, the SIT shall also provide its considered opinion on any actions that may be necessary, and the manner in which such actions may be taken or directed by the Court.
(g) Liberty is granted to the SIT to seek an extension of time, should it be required for the completion of the inquiry.
The Court clarified that the fact-finding exercise being undertaken by the SIT is solely to assist the Court in ascertaining the true factual position. This order is not to be construed as expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations raised in the petitions, nor should it be interpreted as casting any doubt on the functioning of the statutory authorities or Vantara.
The SIT has been requested to commence the fact-finding inquiry without delay and to submit its report, uninfluenced by any of the observations made hereinabove, on or before 12-09-2025.
The matter was directed to be listed on 15-09-2025 for consideration of the report and, if necessary, for issuance of further directions.
[CR Jaya Sukin v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 783/2025, decided on 25-08-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Harsh Vardhan Singh, Adv.,Mr. Akash, Adv.,Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.,Ms. Sejal Sharma, Adv.,Mr. Srajan Shankar Kulshrestha, Adv.,Mr. Ashish Pandey, AOR,Mr. Raghav Sabharwal, Adv.(Item-51.1),Mr. Raghav Malhotra, Adv.,Mr. Harsh Vardhan Singh,Adv., Petitioner-in-person, Ms. Ridhi Goel, Adv., Petitioner-in-person (Item-51), Ms. Divya Mishra, Adv., Ms. Yashika Anand, Adv., Md. Sadath Hussain, Adv., Mrs. Suresh Kumari, Adv.
For Respondent(s): Mr. Manish Tiwari, AOR, Mr. Shardul Singh, Adv.2, Ms. Prerna Gandhi, Adv., Mr. Anish Shahpurkar, Adv., Intervenor-in-person, AOR
Buy Constitution of India HERE
