Case Note & Summary
The petition before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay arose from orders of the High Power Committee directing transfer of a captive female elephant named Mahadevi @ Madhuri from the petitioner trust to the Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust at Jamnagar. The petitioner, a trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 belonging to the Jain discipline, owned the elephant since 1992 and claimed a religious tradition of keeping an elephant for religious programs. The HPC had acted on a complaint by PETA alleging inadequate care and distress of the elephant. The petitioner challenged the HPC orders dated 27 December 2024 and 3 June 2025, and sought directions to prevent coercive action for transfer. The High Court issued Rule and heard the matter finally with consent. Earlier, the HPC by order dated 28 December 2023 directed transfer ex parte. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.3713 of 2024, and the High Court on 13 March 2024 directed the HPC to consider the petitioner's representation dated 7 February 2024 and defer transfer. The HPC constituted a sub-committee which inspected the premises on 12 June 2024 and 29 September 2024. Based on its reports, the HPC on 27 December 2024 again directed transfer. The petitioner filed the present writ petition. The High Court on 28 April 2025 directed fresh hearing before HPC, allowed PETA's intervention application, and kept the petition pending. The HPC heard the petitioner on 17 May 2025, considered documents, and by order dated 3 June 2025 rejected the grievance and directed transfer for the third time. The petitioner amended the petition to include this order, and PETA was impleaded as respondent No.7. The petitioner contended that the orders were illegal, perverse, and in violation of natural justice; that the HPC ignored medical certificates showing recovery; that the complaint about the elephant killing the head priest was false; and that the proviso to Section 43(2) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 permits use of elephants for religious purposes. The petitioner relied on Article 25 of the Constitution and claimed the transfer was mala fide at the instance of PETA to benefit the receiving trust. PETA argued that the petitioner had commercial interest, citing rental of the elephant to Telangana State Waqf Board for Rs.4 lakhs without NOC; produced photographs and veterinary evidence of neglect, chaining, overgrown nails, foot rot, and psychological distress; and asserted that transfer to the specialized care facility was necessary. The High Court considered these submissions and the procedural history; however, the extracted portion of the judgment ends before the court's final analysis and operative decision.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Religious Freedom - Article 25 of Constitution of India - Use of Elephant for Religious Purposes - Petitioner Trust contended that keeping an elephant is integral to Jain religious traditions and that proviso to Section 43(2) of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 permits use for religious purpose; issue arose whether transfer of elephant infringes fundamental right to practice religion (Paras 5.5, 5.6). B) Natural Justice - Fair Hearing - Audi Alteram Partem - Compliance with procedural fairness - Initial HPC order dated 28 December 2023 was ex parte; High Court directed HPC to consider petitioner's representation dated 7 February 2024 and defer transfer; HPC subsequently heard petitioner on 17 May 2025 and passed fresh order on 3 June 2025, but petitioner alleged continued lack of proper adjudication; High Court's interim directions ensured hearing before transfer (Paras 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 5.1, 5.2). C) Wildlife Protection - Captive Elephant Welfare and Rehabilitation - Section 43(2) proviso, Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 - Transfer of captive elephant to recognized elephant care center - HPC directed transfer to Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust based on sub-committee inspection reports and medical evidence indicating distress and neglect; petitioner claimed proper care and religious necessity; court was called to balance animal welfare against religious practice (Paras 4.2-4.5, 6.2-6.5). D) Animal Welfare - Prevention of Cruelty and Neglect - Elephant in Captivity - PETA relied on photographic and veterinary evidence of overgrown toe nails, swelling, psychological distress, chaining, and unauthorized renting for Muharram procession without NOC; petitioner denied allegations and claimed mala fide complaint; court to determine whether transfer necessary for long-term care and rehabilitation (Paras 6.1-6.5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the orders dated 27 December 2024 and 3 June 2025 passed by the High Power Committee directing transfer of captive elephant Mahadevi from the petitioner trust to Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust are legal, valid, and in compliance with natural justice; whether the proviso to Section 43(2) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and Article 25 of the Constitution protect the petitioner's right to keep and use the elephant for religious purposes; and whether the transfer is justified on grounds of elephant welfare.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- compliance with fair hearing before administrative orders
- proviso to Section 43(2) of Wildlife (Protection) Act
- 1972 permitting religious use of elephants
- Article 25 of Constitution of India protecting religious freedom
- judicial review of expert body decisions
- balancing captive elephant welfare against religious practices
