A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and P B Varale set up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice J Chelameswar to examine whether Vantara has violated the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, zoo rules, and international conventions. The SIT will submit a factual report to assist the court in determining whether wildlife laws have been breached.

What the SIT will investigate

The SIT has been tasked with investigating a wide range of allegations against Vantara. These include the acquisition of animals from both India and abroad, particularly elephants, as well as whether the centre is complying with the CITES treaty and import/export laws for live animals. The probe will also look into the standards of animal husbandry, veterinary care, welfare, and causes of animal deaths at the facility. 

Serious claims have also been raised about wildlife smuggling and illegal animal trade being carried out under the guise of conservation, along with allegations of financial irregularities, money laundering, and misuse of resources such as water and carbon credits. With this, the SIT will examine concerns about Vantara’s location near an industrial zone and whether it is being run as a private vanity project rather than a genuine conservation initiative.

The SIT has also been instructed to conduct a physical inspection of the Jamnagar facility, with the Gujarat Forest Department ordered to extend full cooperation.

Background of the case

The investigation began with two PILs filed by lawyer C. R. Jaya Sukin and Dev Sharma, after the controversial transfer of an elephant named Mahadevi from a temple in Kolhapur to Vantara in July. The incident raised broader concerns about the movement of animals into the centre and whether such transfers could be linked to a larger issue of wildlife trafficking.

Judicial warning

While the bench admitted that the petitions are based mainly on media reports, NGO complaints, and social media posts, it said the seriousness of the accusations, ranging from smuggling of endangered species to money laundering, cannot be ignored.

The justices noted that normally such unverified claims would not be entertained, but since the allegations involve both private and statutory authorities, an independent fact-finding inquiry was necessary.

The court clarified that the order does not amount to holding Vantara or government agencies guilty. The SIT’s role is only to uncover the factual position so the court can decide on further action based on evidence.