Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court highlighted the conditions of captivity of the elephants and noted that the elephants, having being kept in captivity for most of their lives, deserve to spend their remaining years in a natural habitat which would ultimately ensure their benefit.
The petitioner pointed out that respondents are keeping the elephants in captivity and in process giving inhuman treatment and out of 10 elephants, 2 elephants died and the respondents have concealed this fact from the Court.
Supreme Court refused to allow relaxation of time for declaration of custody or possession of any captive animal or animal article.
by Nabeela Siddiqui† and Amisha P. Dash††
Madras High Court: G.R. Swaminathan, J., while retention of custody of an Elephant named ‘Lalitha’ to her caretaker with whom she had stayed
Calcutta High Court: Tirthankar Ghosh, J., reversed the order of the trial court (as confirmed by the first appellate court) whereby the petitioner
Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of Dipak Misra, CJ and A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ. sat to decide an appeal