Reliance Industries-owned Vantara Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre in Gujarat is facing probe over petitions filed on allegations that the Supreme Court on Monday called unsupported but set up a special investigation team (SIT) to look into.
The SIT, headed by a former Supreme Court judge justice (retd) Jasti Chelameswar to investigate claims raised against the Vantara Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre, has been directed to submit a report by September 12.
The SIT will also include former high court chief justice Raghavendra Chauhan, former Mumbai Police Commissioner Hemant Nagrale, and Additional Commissioner, Customs, Anish Gupta, as members.
In a statement, a Vantara spokesperson said, “We acknowledge the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court with utmost regard. Vantara remains committed to transparency, compassion and full compliance with the law”.
“Our mission and focus continues to be the rescue, rehabilitation and care of animals. We will extend full cooperation to the Special Investigation Team and continue our work sincerely, always placing the welfare of animals at the heart of all our efforts. We request that the process be allowed to take place without speculation and in the best interest of the animals we serve,” the spokesperson added.
Why is Vantara facing probe?
The Supreme Court order, which the bench of justices Pankaj Mithal and PB Varale said only seeks a fact-finding inquiry, is on two petitions filed by advocate CR Jaya Sukin and one Dev Sharma, seeking an independent enquiry into multiple allegations based on newspaper reports and not backed by evidence.
{{/usCountry}}The Supreme Court order, which the bench of justices Pankaj Mithal and PB Varale said only seeks a fact-finding inquiry, is on two petitions filed by advocate CR Jaya Sukin and one Dev Sharma, seeking an independent enquiry into multiple allegations based on newspaper reports and not backed by evidence.
{{/usCountry}}The broad set of parameters that the Supreme Court sought a report over from the SIT includes: Vantara’s acquisition of animals from India and abroad, particularly elephants; its compliance with the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 and the rules for zoos made thereunder; with provisions of the law regarding trade in animals or animal articles, and with the standards of animal husbandry, veterinary care and animal welfare.
The SIT was also asked to examine complaints over misutilisation of water and carbon credits, as well as those on issues of financial compliance, money laundering etc.
The Supreme Court bench on Monday said ordinarily, “a petition resting on such unsupported allegations does not deserve in law to be entertained rather warrants dismissal in limine.” However, the bench added, that it deems appropriate to call for an inquiry in the wake of allegations that the statutory authorities or courts are unwilling or incapable of carrying out its mandate.
“Considering the sweep of the allegations made in the petitions inviting a counter from the private respondent or any other party will not serve much purpose. Ordinarily, a petition resting on such unsupported allegations does not deserve in law to be entertained rather warrants dismissal in limine. However, in the wake of the allegations that the statutory authorities or the courts are either unwilling or incapable of discharging their mandate…we consider it appropriate in the ends of justice to call for an independent factual appraisal which may establish the violation, as alleged, if any,” the bench said, as quoted in an earlier HT report.
Maintaining that the order only seeks a fact-finding inquiry to ascertain the true factual position to enable the court to pass further orders, the Supreme Court bench said, “..this order neither expresses any opinion on the allegations made in the petitions nor this (should) order be construed to have cast any doubt on the functioning of any of the statutory authorities or the private respondent-Vantara”.
The petitions were first taken up for hearing on August 14 when the apex court allowed the petitioners to add Vantara as a party before it. However, no notice was issued to the Centre or state or any other agency including Vantara before passing the present order.