New Delhi, March 19 The Supreme Court has dismissed another plea alleging violation of international wildlife norms in the import of endangered species by Vantara, a zoological rescue and rehabilitation center in Jamnagar, Gujarat.
The top court last year dismissed a similar public interest litigation (PIL) and held that there was "no violation of the law" while accepting a clean chit given by its Special Investigation Team, headed by former Supreme Court judge Justice J Chelameswar, to Vantara.
A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and N V Anjaria recently dismissed the plea filed by the Karanartham Viramah Foundation.
The plea sought directions to the Centre, the Central Zoo Authority, and others to submit to the apex court all records pertaining to permissions, recognitions, and import/export licenses granted to the Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre, popularly known as Vantara, and its Radha Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust since 2019.
The bench noted that the issue had already been addressed by the apex court in a previous petition filed last year and said, "More importantly, disturbing the settled environment, the custody, and the living conditions of animals, including those rescued after lawful import, may itself constitute cruelty."
It stated that the subject matter of the petition was the same as that considered in a previous petition filed by lawyer Jaya Sukin.
"The SIT constituted by this Court examined these matters, and the SIT's final report was accepted by this court on September 15, 2025. It categorically states that no violation of any domestic or international law was found," the bench said in its order of March 9, which was recently uploaded.
The top court stated that the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) document relied upon by the petitioner does not support his case.
"On the contrary, the document states that the CITES Secretariat found no evidence that the animals were imported without the necessary CITES documentation or import permits, and there is no evidence that these imports were for commercial purposes. Thus, this conclusion aligns with the findings of the SIT, which was accepted by this court," the top court said.
The bench noted that once an import has been made under valid permission, it cannot subsequently be treated as prohibited for the importer simply because objections were raised later.
"Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed," it ordered.
The petitioner foundation has sought multiple directions, including the establishment of an Independent National Wildlife Trade Compliance Monitoring Committee, chaired by a retired Judge of this court and comprising eminent experts in wildlife biology, international trade regulation, and environmental law, with the mandate to verify the legality and authenticity of all CITES import, export, and re-export permits.
Similarly, on September 15 last year, the top court said that there was "no violation of the law" while accepting a clean chit given by its Special Investigation Team to Vantara.
It had taken note of the SIT's report, as well as the satisfaction of the probe team regarding compliance and regulatory measures in Vantara.
The top court constituted a four-member SIT headed by a former apex court judge on August 25 last year, while hearing two PILs alleging irregularities against Vantara based on media and social media reports, as well as complaints from NGOs and wildlife organizations.
It came to light that the SIT, after a thorough investigation in coordination with multiple agencies, "clearly opined" and held that no violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the Recognition of Zoo Rules, 2009, CZA guidelines, Customs Act, 1962, Foreign Trade (Regulation and development) Act, 1992, Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, was found.
"The Court has no hesitation in accepting the conclusion drawn in the report. Thus, since the SIT has found no violation of law, the complaints, particularly those listed in Schedule A in the summary of the report, stand closed," the top court had said.
Relying on the SIT report, the top court held that Vantara received the animals "by rescuing them from various situations and housing them in the rescue center for conservation and breeding programs" through a complex, multi-layered, or multi-jurisdictional statutory approvals, procedures, and documentation.
"The import of these animals was made only after valid permits were issued. Once the import of animals is fully documented and supported by valid permits, it is not open for anyone to go beyond these permits and to dispute the validity of these permits or official acts," it had said.