The decision reinforces that possession and transfer of wildlife must adhere to the Wildlife (Protection) Act's strict regulations to prevent illegal captivity and trade.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of February 2021 S.MANIKUMAR, C.J.

Instant writ petition is filed in public interest for a direction to seize the elephant, in possession of Mr. Chandran O., Ottapath House, Edakunni Village, Thrissur, the 12th respondent under Section 50(c) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 , since the elephant, according to the petitioner, is in illegal possession of the 12th respondent. Further prayer sought for is to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the Secretary, Animal Welfare Board of India, Tiruvanmiyoor, Chennai, the 11th respondent to appoint a team of experts consisting respondent medical team, to examine the elephant Choppy Kuttisankaran and report the present medical condition of the elephant. Another prayer sought for is to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the official respondents to provide necessary medical treatment, care to the elephant Choppys Kuttisankaran based on the report of the expert team of the 11th respondent and to rehabilitate the elephant in a proper facility available under the 2nd respondent.

2. I.A.No.1 of 2020 has been filed in this writ petition under Section 155 of the Kerala High Court Rules seeking permission to amend the writ petition as follows:

“After Para 23 in facts add “23 (A). Counter affidavits have been filed by respondent No.12 as also respondent No.2-6 and 8-10. From the counter affidavit of the Respondents

2-6 & 8-10 [and documents thereof,] following facts are clear.

a) No ownership certificate is issued in favour of any person with respect to the elephant in question.

b) When microchip certificate (Annexure R2(A)) was issued, the elephant was called "Sai Krishnan" and was possessed by one Smt. Haripriya.

c) It is stated in Annexure R2(A) that the elephant is born in Bihar and was aged 11 years on 2/10/2006.

d) By a gift deed" elephant was handed over to one Mr Joyce Joseph. The reason for the "gift" is that Smt. Haripriya is unable to look after the elephant and that Mr. Joyce Joseph is her 'intimate friend". The responsibility of the elephant from that day, it is stated, would be with Mr.

Joyce Joseph.

e) The above transaction, states the official respondents, is evidently a commercial transaction under the guise of a gift which is prohibited under Section 43 of the 1972 Act.

f) In an identical manner, Mr. Joyce Joseph "gifted the elephant to the 12th respondent by Annexure R2(B) and thus the elephant remains with the 12th respondent.

g) The 12th respondent has submitted Annexure R2(E) which is the declaration under Section 40 (4) of the 1972 Act, on 15.3.2016, based on Exhibit P4.

The above facts clearly indicates that the respondents 12-14 have committed various offences under the 1972 Act and other provisions of law. The respondents 2-4, who are duty bound to take action against such criminal offences as failed in their duty to take any action. This warrants interference from this Honourable Court.

After ground E add F) The elephant admittedly is aged 11 years in 2006. Thus it was born after 1986, the hunting of such any wild animal is prohibited under Section 9 except in accordance with Sections 11 and 12 of the 1972 Act. If an elephant, a Schedule I animal, is be it can be hunted only with the permission of the Chief Wildlife Warden of the respective state under Section 11 (1)(a) of the 1972 Act. Such hunting can be permitted only on specific grounds. Once hunted the elephant can be retained in captivity only after a decision in accordance with proviso to Section 11 (1)(a) is taken. Hunting includes capturing, coursing, driving etc. of a captive animal also Section 2 (16) of the 1972 Act). It is apparent that neither any permission under Section 11 nor any decision under proviso to Section 11 (1) is there in respect of the elephant in question Respondents 12-14 have thus committed offences punishable under Section 51 read with Section 9 of the 1972 Act. Offic