Uttarakhand govt grants sanction to prosecute Corbett tiger reserve director

The development comes after the state government was pulled up by the top court last week for denying sanction for prosecution of the IFS officer Rahul in connection with the Corbett safari probe

The Uttarakhand government has decided to grant sanction to prosecute former Corbett tiger reserve director in a case involving his alleged role in illegal felling of trees and unauthorised construction as part of the tiger safari project in the buffer zone of the Corbett tiger reserve.

The top court had in March last year directed a probe by the CBI into the illegalities committed. (HT file photo)

The development comes after the state government was pulled up by the top court last week for denying sanction for prosecution of the Indian Forest Service (IFS) officer Rahul (goes by one single name) in connection with the Corbett safari probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) which named him an accused in its investigation report.

In its reply submitted to the Supreme Court on Tuesday, joint secretary Satyaprakash Singh in the state forest department said, “While respectfully maintaining before this court that the earlier decision to decline sanction was a bonafide decision, the state government has now taken a conscious decision to grant sanction to prosecute Sh. Rahul as requested by the CBI.”

The reply, a copy of which has been seen by HT, comes a day before the hearing in the matter before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai.

On September 8, when the court had directed the state to clear its stand on the next date of hearing, the bench questioned if there was an attempt to shield the officer. The court had cited an earlier instance in August 2024 when the same officer, while under suspension following the Corbett case, was sought to be made the Field Director of Rajaji Tiger Reserve.

The decision was rolled back after court intervened and criticised chief minister Pushkar Singh Dhami who overruled the objections noted by the rank and file of the forest department up to the forest minister who opposed this move.

Denying any attempt to protect the officer, the reply of the state said, “The state government has thereafter taken legal advice as it had no intention to protect any officer except in accordance with law.”

Justifying its earlier decision to deny sanction, the affidavit said, “It was the bonafide view of the state government that the case in hand may perhaps be a case in which departmental proceedings for major penalty may suffice and the investigation report does not justify grant of sanction as requested by the CBI.”

It said that the question regarding grant/refusal of sanction was examined by the State Government in detail. “Based upon the legal advice which was immediately accepted by the state government, it was decided to revisit the questions of grant of sanction in view of the sufficient factual developments which have taken place,” it added.

The state further clarified that due to “sheer inadvertence” and certain events happening with regard to delinquent officers, an impression is created that the State Government wishes to protect a particular officer…I state and submit that the state of Uttarakhand is fully committed to ensure compliance with all environmental laws, assist in investigation and prosecution of anyone involved in violation of laws in general and that of environmental laws in particular.”

The top court had in March last year directed a probe by the CBI into the illegalities committed with regard to felling of trees and illegal construction at Corbett without seeking formal approvals. A total of eight officials were named by CBI of which the highest ranking official was the then Corbett director Rahul. Besides him, two other IFS officials – then divisional forest officers (DFO) Akhilesh Tiwari and Kishan Chand – were named.

By the same order, the court had directed the state to proceed departmentally against the delinquent officers. After receiving the CBI report, the state granted sanction against all other accused officials, while making an exception in the case of Rahul. The state said, “On a careful perusal of the said report (of CBI), it was found that the memorandum of charges leveled against the delinquent Rahul requires to be modified and charges for major penalties require to be added.”

The state revised its earlier charge sheet against Rahul and issued him a fresh one on July 3, 2025 including charges for major penalties.

As regards denial of sanction, the state had on September 8 told the court that upon consultation with the legal department, it was found that there was no basis for granting sanction for prosecution.

The bench had remarked on that day, “It is clear you are trying to protect this officer… You come clear on this decision by September 17, or else you are in big trouble. Let the highest authority in the state know that if somebody is trying to protect this officer, he shall not be dealt with a light hand.”

Besides the three IFS officers, five other persons were charge-sheeted by CBI.

The CBI proceeded with investigation of the case following an order of the Uttarakhand high court in September 2023 and on March 6, 2024, the Supreme Court upheld the order while allowing the safari to function alongside rescue and rehabilitation centre for injured, conflict animals within the reserve.

The order of the court came on a petition filed by advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal who highlighted the unauthorised construction of tourist lodges contrary to the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 and the Forest Conservation Act.

The CBI has slapped charges of criminal conspiracy, forgery and criminal breach of trust under sections 120-B, 467, 471, 409, among other provisions of Indian Penal Code (IPC), and for corruption under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(a) of the Prevention and Corruption Act, 1988 besides relevant provisions under other environmental laws.

The expert body central empowered committee (CEC) assisting the court found that the proposal for the felling of trees at the site of Pakhru Tiger Safari was submitted to ministry of environment forests and climate change (MoEFCC) seeking permission to fell only 163 trees for the 106.16 Hectares space approved for establishment of the Tiger Safari.

However, the Forest Survey of India (FSI) later confirmed in its report of October 20, 2022 that an estimated 2,651 trees were felled and another 534 trees for construction of tourist accommodation facilities and water bodies outside the safari.