By Aaratrika

Copyright thehindubusinessline

The Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Supreme Court to conduct an “independent factual appraisal” of complaints against Reliance-owned Vantara, a zoological rescue and rehabilitation centre in Jamnagar, Gujarat, has found no statutory irregularities in the acquisition of animals.

The SIT, headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice J. Chelameswar, concluded that the acquisitions were in accordance with regulatory laws and recorded the satisfaction of authorities on all statutory compliances.

Court approval

A Bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B. Varale read out excerpts from the report in open court and said it was satisfied with the findings. “We have gone through the summary of the report. It notes erudite regulatory compliance. It notes that stakeholders also presented views. Authorities have expressed satisfaction with the regulatory compliance,” the Bench said. The court added that it would pass an order later in the day incorporating the report.

Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for Anant Ambani’s Vantara, opposed making the SIT report public and urged that a “quietus” be given to the controversy once and for all. “There is some degree of commercial confidentiality that has to be maintained. This facility is one of its kind in the world. We do not want that tomorrow there are reports appearing in the New York Times. We must have a decent burial on this issue,” he submitted. He also sought a copy of the report, stating that if it contained any suggestions for improvement, the authorities at Vantara could benefit from them.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State of Gujarat, concurred with Mr. Salve’s submission that the report should not be made public, but said it may be shared with the authorities at Vantara to enable it to act on any recommendations. He added that while he was not privy to the contents of the report, the questions framed by the court in its August 25 order covered all aspects of the facility’s functioning.

The court was hearing two petitions filed by advocates C.R. Jaya Sukin and Dev Sharma, who had alleged irregularities at Vantara on the basis of media reports, social media posts, and complaints from NGOs and wildlife organisations regarding alleged violations of law and the acquisition of animals from India and abroad, particularly elephants.

It had earlier said that although petitions raising such “unsupported allegations” do not deserve to be entertained, it would be appropriate to order an independent inquiry to meet “the ends of justice”.

During the hearing, the petitioners sought to respond to the SIT report, citing news reports that an elephant, which had performed rituals at a Jammu and Kashmir temple for two decades, was taken to Vantara by government officials. Mr. Salve questioned the locus of the petitioner, pointing out that the temple authorities themselves had not raised any grievance.

Refusing to entertain the allegation, the Bench remarked, “If somebody wants to acquire an animal and follows the law, what is wrong with it? You have elephants used for processions in temples. We won’t go into individual allegations.”

The court further said it would “go by the report” of the SIT and indicated that no further individual grievances would be entertained. It also commended the SIT for promptly submitting its report by September 12 in compliance with its earlier direction.

Besides Justice Chelameswar, the members of the SIT included Justice Raghavendra Chauhan, former Chief Justice of Uttarakhand and Telangana High Courts; Hemant Nagrale, IPS (former Mumbai Police Commissioner); and Anish Gupta, IRS, Additional Commissioner, Customs.

The court had instructed the special team to look into grievances raised about the “creation of a vanity or private collection, breeding, conservation programmes and use of biodiversity resources, misutilisation of water and carbon credits, breach of laws of trade in animals or animal articles, wildlife smuggling and money laundering.”

The SIT had been asked to submit a report on a broad set of parametres such as Vantara’s acquisition of animals from India and abroad, particularly elephants; its compliance with the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the rules for zoos made thereunder; with provisions of the law regarding trade in animals or animal articles, and with the standards of animal husbandry, veterinary care and animal welfare.

“The SIT may inquire into any other aspect it deems appropriate to submit a complete factual report to this court,” the Bench had ordered.

Published on September 15, 2025