HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, SHAJI P.CHALY, J
GAURAV TEWARI – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C)/14325/2020
Wildlife - Protection of Animals - Article 48A, Article 51A - The court emphasized the constitutional duties to protect wildlife, interpreting provisions that mandate state responsibility and citizen involvement in animal welfare, influencing its decision to prompt immediate action by the government.
Fact of the Case:
A petition was filed to compel the state government to protect wild animals in Kerala from external threats, improve water and food provisions in forests, and prevent their straying into populated areas. This was prompted by neglect leading to attacks on animals and conflicts with humans.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the state had taken various measures as per guidelines for managing human-elephant conflicts, which satisfied the petitioner's requests. The government was directed to expedite these proposals and actions.
Issues: Whether the state government has taken adequate steps to protect wildlife and prevent human-animal conflict in accordance with constitutional provisions and established guidelines.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the state has a constitutional duty to protect wildlife and ensure humane coexistence between humans and animals, necessitating prompt and effective measures.
Final Decision: Writ petition disposed of with directions to expedite action on wildlife conflict mitigation.
J U D G M E N T
S. Manikumar, C. J.
Instant writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:-
“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing or compelling the respondents 1 to 5 to take such adequate and effective measures so that the wild animals in the various forest division of Kerala are protected from the attack from outside world;
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing or compelling the respondents 1 to 5 to provide sufficient fodder and drinking water inside the forest so that these elephants/wild animals do not stray into the habitated areas;
iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction directing or compelling the respondents 2, 4 & 5 to have check dams and troughs filled with water inside the various forests in Kerala so as to enable the elephants/other animals in the forest to have sufficient food and water for their sustenance;
iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents herein to make clear demarcation between the boundaries of forests and private lands/highways and use such protective devices in the boundaries so as to prevent the wild animals from straying into human habitant.”
2. Short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as hereunder:-
a) According to the petitioner, he is an Indian citizen residing at Ontario in Canada, as he is professionally employed there. Petitioner has submitted that instances are legion in the history of Kerala, wherein due to the absolute negligence of the Government and its officials, many wild animals are facing brutal attacks on them, which has compelled the writ petitioner to file this pro bono litigation before this Court, seeking protection for animals living in the forest, and also for a direction to the Government to take remedial measures in this regard. Petitioner is an avid animal lover and is involved in many philanthropic activities in various parts of India and it was the recent incident which was flashed in all the media across the world, wherein on 27.05.2020, a pregnant elephant succumbed to injuries, which was caused due to eating of pineapple filled with crackers in the State of Kerala, which has prompted the petitioner to approach this Court.
b) Referring to Article 48A Part IV of the Constitution of India , petitioner has further submitted that the State is bound to protect and safeguard the wild life of the country. Article 51A Part IV A of the casts duties on every citizen of India. One such duty which is cast on a citizen is to protect and improve the natural environment and to have compassion for living creatures.
c) Petitioner has produced Exts. P1 and P2 reports dated May
1999 and January 2016 respectively, which were submitted to the Government, against which no action has been taken by the Government.
d) Petitioner has contended that regarding the damage to the crops caused by wild animals, there has not been any study to find out the cause for damages caused by the wild animals and what measures could be adopted by the Government in order to prevent the wild animals from straying into habitated areas. It is usually in summer that these wild animals stray into human habitations. One of the main reason for the straying of these wild animals into human habitation during summer is the lack of drinking water inside the forest. Therefore these wild animals stray into the human habitated areas to quench their thirst. While straying into these areas, it is only natural that they may stumble upon the cultivated areas. Therefore to ensure adequate water inside the forest itself, it is only proper for the Government to have check dams inside the forest and troughs created inside the forest and see that these troughs are filled with water.
e) Petitioner has further contended that the menace of wild elephants, which stray to habitat areas, occur in very many States in India. How
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.