HC Closes Zoo Safety PIL as Central Zoo Authority Forms Expert Panel

In a significant move for workplace safety in animal protection facilities, the High Court of Karnataka has disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought to mandate comprehensive safety protocols for zoo personnel across the nation. The petition, filed by Bhuvan M, sought judicial intervention to force the Central Zoo Authority (CZA) to establish Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) following a series of fatal accidents involving veterinarians and animal keepers.

The Catalyst: Tragic Losses at Animal Enclosures

The petitioner drew the court's attention to a distressing pattern of incidents within zoo premises, highlighted by a tragic case at the Shimoga Zoo where a veterinary professional was killed in an attack by a hippopotamus. The petitioner argued that the absence of formal safety guidelines left zoo staff—often working in high-risk zones—without adequate protection or standardized emergency response protocols. Leveraging information obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the petitioner emphasized that the CZA lacked documented SOPs for such hazardous duties, necessitating a court-mandated directive.

Legal Standpoint and CZA’s Proactive Pivot

During the proceedings before a bench led by Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha, the respondent (CZA) demonstrated that the administration had already recognized these systemic gaps. Counsel for the CZA presented an Office Order dated May 5, 2026, which formally constituted an expert committee tasked with revamping safety standards.

The terms of reference for this new committee are extensive, covering: * Critical review of current veterinary practices. * Development of species-specific handling and restraint measures. * Implementation of safety infrastructure and night-time operational guidelines. * Creation of accountability mechanisms for monitoring compliance.

Key Observations from the Bench

The Court noted that since the executive branch had already initiated a robust administrative response to the safety crisis, further judicial mandates were unnecessary. The Bench made the following observations during the hearing:

> "The petitioner has referred to various incidents where the zoo staff, veterinarians and other persons have been mauled and suffered fatal injuries as a result of their entering animal enclosures in course of their duties."

> "According to the petitioner, the response furnished by the Central Public Information Officer is that there are no SOPs, safety protocols or related documents setting out the safety protocols which are presently available."

> "Since the respondents have already taken steps for formulating the SOPs and risk management protocols, we do not think it apposite to issue any further directions in this regard."

The Road Ahead: A Shift Toward Regulatory Rigor

By disposing of the petition, the High Court has highlighted a functional approach to Public Interest Litigation: where the state demonstrates proactive and institutional remedial action, the court respects the administrative autonomy of the expert bodies involved.

For zoo staff and veterinary professionals, the formation of this expert committee marks a turning point. If effectively implemented, these upcoming SOPs will create a standardized framework, significantly reducing the "risk assessment" voids that have historically plagued zoo management in India. Future compliance with these protocols will likely become the benchmark for operational licenses, ensuring that safety is no longer discretionary but a mandatory component of zoo management.