SC orders SIT probe into Vantara over alleged ‘mistreatment, unlawful acquisition of animals’ – India News

The Supreme Court on Monday constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) and ordered a “forthwith” probe over alleged “mistreatment, unlawful acquisition of animals” at Vantara, the animal rehabilitation and rescue centre in Gujarat’s Jamnagar.

The SIT will be led by former SC judge Justice J Chelameswar, and will include former Chief Justice of Uttarakhand and Telangana High Court Justice Raghavendra Chauhan, former Mumbai Police Commissioner Hemant Nagrale and Additional Commissioner (Customs) Anish Gupta.

The court’s order came while hearing two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) after an elephant named Mahadevi was relocated from a temple in Kolhapur to Vantara in July. One of the PILs was filed by lawyer CR Jaya Sukin and another by Dev Sharma.

What will SIT examine?

The SIT will probe how Vantara acquires animals, both from India and abroad, particularly elephants. It will also investigate if the process is in line with the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, and regulations for zoos.

Not just that, the SIT would also look into the compliance with the Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES), import and export laws and other statutory requirements concerning imports and exports of live animals; as well as standards related to animal husbandry, veterinary care, animal welfare, mortalities and causes.

The SIT would also look into other concerns, including climate conditions for animals, creation of a vanity or private collection, conservation and breeding practices, misuse of biodiversity resources, misutilisation of water and carbon credits, and allegations of trade in animals or animal articles, wildlife smuggling etc., “as made out in the articles or complaints referred to in the petitions as well as generally”.

It will also probe into money laundering and other complaints and issues “germane to the allegations made in these Petitions”.

The team will carry out a “physical verification” and “inspection” of Vantara, with assistance from the Gujarat Forest Department. It must submit its report to the apex court by September 12.

‘Fact-finding inquiry’: SC

The bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and P B Varale, however, clarified that it is simply a “fact-finding” inquiry to establish “true factual position”. It clarified that the order doesn’t express any opinion on the allegations made in the petitions.

“[It] 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,” the bench went on to say.

The bench observed that the petitions largely rely on news reports and complaints made by wildlife organisations, along with NGOs. “[They] make accusations of wide amplitude viz, unlawful acquisition of animals from India and abroad, mistreatment of the animals in captivity, financial irregularities, money laundering, etc,” the court noted.

It added that the petitions “are not confined to making allegations against the private respondent ‘Vantara’ but also cast aspersions upon statutory authorities such as Central Zoo Authority, The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), as well as courts”.

The court underscored, “In short, the petitions proceed to indict the above-referred institutions simply based upon media reporting.”

The apex court noted that the pleas only make allegations without providing “supporting material”. However, considering the grave allegations, inviting a counter “will not serve much purpose”.

The court said, “Ordinarily, a petition resting on such unsupported allegations does not deserve in law to be entertained, but rather warrants dismissal.” However, it noted that given the allegations, the “statutory authorities or the courts are either unwilling or incapable of discharging their mandate, more particularly in the absence of verification of correctness of the factual situation, we consider it appropriate in the ends of justice to call for an independent factual appraisal”.

_{Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.}