Clean chit for Vantara: Apex court says SIT ‘exhaustive’ probe found no violation in law… complaints closed

Welcoming the court’s decision, a statement issued by Vantara said: “The SIT’s report and the Supreme Court’s order have made it clear that the doubts and allegations raised against Vantara’s animal welfare mission were without any basis. The validation of the truth by the distinguished and widely respected members of the SIT is not just a relief for everyone at Vantara but also a blessing, because it allows our work to speak for itself.”

On August 25, the court had issued directions for setting up a four-member SIT, led by former SC judge Justice Jasti Chelameswar, on the basis of two PILs filed in the wake of a controversy over the shifting of an elephant from a temple in Kolhapur to Vantara in July. The SIT visited Vantara for three days in the first week of September and submitted its report on September 12.

The report “indicates that the SIT, with the help of multiple Central and State agencies, regulatory and enforcement bodies, had examined reports and affidavits, conducted site visits, obtained expert opinion and granted personal hearings. The SIT… covered the entire range of allegations not only concerning acquisition of animals, smuggling, laundering, but also regarding welfare and husbandry, conservation and breeding, climatic and location issues, and financial and trade improprieties,” the bench said on Monday.

“It is also evident that the SIT coordinated with the Central Zoo Authority, Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, CITES Management Authority of India, Central Bureau of Investigation, Directorate of Enforcement, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Customs Department and the jurisdictional police and carried out a thorough and extensive investigation into complaints,” it said.

“The SIT, after thorough investigation in coordination with the above multiple agencies, clearly opined and concluded that there is no violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Recognition of Zoo Rules, 2009, CZA guidelines, Customs Act, 1962, Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora,” the bench said.

Saying that it “has no hesitation in accepting the conclusion so drawn in the report”, the bench said, “thus, as no contravention of law has been reported by the SIT, the complaints…stand closed”.

In its order, the court said that based on the SIT report, it is “of the opinion that the receipt of animals by… Vantara, by rescuing them from various situations and housing them in the rescue centre for conservation and breeding programmes, have gone through a complex multi-layered/ multi-jurisdictional statutory approvals, procedure and documentation. The imports of the animals have been made only after issuance of valid permits. Once the imports of animals is fully documented and supported by valid permits, it is not open for anyone to go beyond the said permits and to dispute the validity attached to such permits or official acts. The import clearance in India is after various checks and compliances which are regulated and enforced by multiple statutory authorities as recorded by the SIT in the summary of the report.”

“Repeated inquiries into the affairs of Vantara pursuant to multiple complaints/ petitions filed from time to time have culminated with findings of no violation of law whatsoever. Thus, there is apparently no merit in any of the allegations of animal smuggling or laundering,” it said.

“Upon consideration of the entire record, we are more than satisfied that the facilities at Vantara in certain respects exceeds the prescribed standards of animal husbandry, veterinary care and welfare as well as the statutory benchmarks laid down by the Central Zoo Authority. Independent bodies such as Global Human Society, after site inspection and audit through a team, has certified that… Vantara has not only complied with, but exceeded internationally recognised benchmarks. It has been awarded ‘Global Humane Certified Seal of Approval’, which is of significance as it provides independent validation of standards of welfare and conservation of animals,” it said.

“Periodic inspection by the Central Zoo Authority and the Chief Wildlife Warden of Gujarat, along with assessments by CITES, reinforced the above conclusion. The allegations of deficiency in welfare standard are therefore unfounded,” it said.

Accepting the SIT’s report, the court directed that the allegations be treated as investigated and closed, a copy of the entire report be given to Vantara, and a summary of it “not be treated as confidential”.

Earlier in the day, when the court took up the matter for hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing Gujarat, and Senior Advocate Harish Salve, appearing for

Vantara, told the court that it may not be necessary to make the entire report public.

Salve said that when the SIT visited Vantara, the entire staff was at their disposal and everything was shown to them. He said there was “certain proprietary information as to how the animals are being looked after… how do you keep these animals in good health…”

“Large monies have been spent with experts to develop these. There is some degree of commercial confidentiality. Your Lordships must understand this is something which is the rival of the world, this kind of facility. A lot of the narrative which has started is also trying to bring this down. So if the whole record is put, we don’t want the rest of the world to know, because then tomorrow you will see there is another article in The New York Times, and you will see another article in Time magazine,” he said.

Justice Mithal responded: “No, we will not permit. We are closing the matter. We are accepting the report. We will not permit anyone to raise such objections… We were not inclined to entertain the writ petition. But since there were certain allegations, we thought it proper to let them be investigated.”

Mehta said it was between the committee and the court’s satisfaction. “If Your Lordships are satisfied,” there is no need for further actions, he said.

“We are satisfied with the report of the committee,” the bench said. “Now, we have the report of an independent committee, they have gone through everything, they have taken help of experts also. Whatever report they have submitted, we will go by that. And all authorities will be free to take action on the basis of the recommendations and suggestions… we will not permit anyone to raise questions again and again.”

Salve said Vantara would act in pursuance of the recommendations.

When a counsel said an interim application has been filed with respect to an elephant being taken away from a Jammu and Kashmir temple, the court said it would not go into it. Justice Mithal said no unnecessary allegation must be made now that an independent body has found no foul play.

“See, there are certain things which we probably feel are the pride of this country. We should not unnecessarily rake up all these matters and raise hue and cry for the sake of that. Allow certain good things to happen in the country… We should be happy about all these good things… If the acquisition of an elephant is in accordance with the law, what is the difficulty? See, if somebody wants to acquire an elephant and he takes care of the provisions of law and acquires, what is wrong in it? It will depend on case to case, not general direction…You maintain your elephants in the temple and use them for processions, use it for Dussehra festival. In Mysore, they do it every year. You keep doing it,” Justice Mithal said.