In a crucial move towards wildlife conservation, the Chhattisgarh High Court took cognizance of an alarming report on tiger poaching within the Guru Ghasidas National Park. The court has directed the state’s Additional Chief Secretary, Forest and Climate Change Department, to file a detailed affidavit addressing measures taken to protect wildlife in this critical region. This suo moto Public Interest Litigation (PIL), listed as WPPIL No. 92 of 2024, was initiated following a report published by The Times of India on November 10, 2024, which highlighted the recent death of a tiger, suspected to be a case of revenge killing.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, underscored the gravity of the situation, expressing concerns over the state’s wildlife conservation efforts in the unreserved areas of Guru Ghasidas Park. Representing the State, Advocate General Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, alongside Deputy Advocate General Mr. Shashank Thakur, addressed the court’s queries. Additionally, Ms. Anmol Sharma appeared on behalf of the Central Government as counsel for Respondent No. 2.
Case Background
The present PIL was initiated based on the aforementioned news article, detailing a tiger carcass discovered in Guru Ghasidas Park, which had seen a similar case in June 2022. This instance, as reported, involved an alleged revenge killing, evidenced by a half-eaten buffalo near the carcass, pointing towards possible poisoning. The report raised concerns over the adequacy of protection in the park’s unreserved areas, which are not under the same stringent wildlife protection protocols as other national reserves.
The bench, noting the repetition of such incidents, questioned the frequency of patrolling, response to previous cases, and preventive measures by the forest department. The court sought clarity on concrete actions being implemented by the state to deter poaching activities, particularly in unreserved park areas that lack strict monitoring.
Key Legal Issue
At the core of the case is the question of responsibility and accountability of the state in wildlife conservation, particularly for unreserved areas, where wildlife often faces greater risks. The court emphasized that protection of endangered species like tigers is paramount, as they are not only crucial to ecological balance but are also legally protected under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
The judges raised a fundamental issue of “whether adequate steps are in place to prevent the recurring threats to wildlife, particularly in unreserved zones within state jurisdiction.” This question places a spotlight on the state’s legal obligation to ensure wildlife safety across all protected and unreserved regions.
Court Observations and Directions
The court ordered the Additional Chief Secretary, Forest and Climate Change, to submit an affidavit within ten days detailing steps taken to safeguard wildlife and prevent further poaching incidents. Chief Justice Sinha and Justice Prasad commented on the urgency of proactive measures, stating, “Repetitive incidents of tiger killings reflect a disturbing laxity in enforcement of wildlife protection norms.” The court further remarked, “Conservation cannot be restricted to reserved areas; unreserved zones are equally deserving of stringent protection to deter such heinous acts.”
The hearing has been adjourned to November 21, 2024, when the state’s affidavit will be reviewed to assess the adequacy of the measures outlined.
