Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking a direction to the respondent/authorities to release the captured elephants and to rehabilitate them in the wild with the aid and assistance of experts, a division bench of Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra, JJ., granted two weeks’ time to the petitioner to file a counter to the memo submitted by the State in compliance with the previous court.
In the instant atter, the petitioner filed the present PIL seeking directions for the release and rehabilitation of elephants captured by the State authorities. According to the petitioner, the captured elephants were not causing harm or injury to life or property and were captured merely because they were causing “nuisance”.
The petitioner alleged that the elephants were being kept in small enclosures to tame them for potential use by the forest department. The petitioner raised concern regarding the prolonged confinement of the elephants, which could negatively impact their behavior and prevent their rehabilitation into the wild. The petitioner cited a newspaper article that highlighted the adverse conditions in which the elephants were kept. The petitioner requested that expert opinions, particularly from specialists dealing with elephants, be sought to determine the appropriate course of action for the elephants’ care and rehabilitation.
The Court, vide order dated 28-08-2024, directed the Director of the Centre for Studies on Elephants, College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy, Thrissur, Kerala, to depute a Senior Professor or Project Leader to appear via video conferencing at the next hearing. The Court also sought expert assistance to determine the appropriate steps for the care and rehabilitation of the captured elephants and to provide suggestions on how the elephants could be returned to their natural habitat.
The petitioner raised concerns about the committee responsible for the behavioral assessment and rehabilitation strategies for the rescued elephants. While the committee comprised of the wildlife experts, the petitioner contended that they lack specialization in handling elephants, particularly because elephants are a new species to the Madhya Pradesh terrain, migrating from Chhattisgarh.
The Court noted that it is undisputed by the respondents that elephants are native to Chhattisgarh and have migrated to Madhya Pradesh. The Court was informed that between two wild elephants captured by the State Authorities, one is undergoing rehabilitation, while the other, being injured, is receiving medical treatment and once treated, the injured elephant will also undergo rehabilitation. The Court also learned that out of the 10 elephants captured in Madhya Pradesh over the last 10 years, two have died, and efforts to preserve their natural environment have shifted towards domestication.
On the Court’s suggestion, an expert from Thrissur, Kerala, which has a large population of wild elephants, joined via video conferencing. The Court noted that the petitioner suggested that experts from Kerala or other states with experience in handling wild elephants should be consulted for proper rehabilitation, however, the respondents defended the committee formed by Madhya Pradesh authorities.
The Court granted the petitioner two weeks to file a counter to the memo submitted by the respondents in compliance with the order dated 12-09-2024 and scheduled the next date of hearing on 14-10-2024.
[Nitin Singhvi v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine MP 6180, Decided on 25-09-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Shri Anshuman Singh, Counsel for the Petitioner
Shri B D Singh – Dy. Advocate General, Counsel for the Respondent No. 2
