TreeTake Network
In a significant legal development within India's conservation sector, the prominent non-governmental organisation Wildlife SOS has formally committed to absolute judicial compliance following a recent ruling by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court. The High Court has recalled the interim protection order previously granted to the organisation's Chief Executive Officer and Co-founder, Kartick Satyanarayan, in relation to an ongoing criminal investigation spearheaded by the State Tiger Strike Force (STSF). This report contextualises the severe friction between state forest investigators and the wildlife organisation, detailing allegations of procedural non-compliance, public vilification, and the underlying influence of illicit poaching cartels.
The multi-state investigation commenced following the high-profile seizure of ten leopard skins in Agra, Uttar Pradesh, which the STSF subsequently traced back to procurement channels in Madhya Pradesh. State forest investigators subsequently took two key individuals into custody: an alleged wildlife contraband trader, Bhagwan Singh, and Wildlife SOS director Wasim Akram. The STSF alleges that the detained personnel operated on direct instructions from the NGO’s leadership to stage poaching operations for external institutional gain. Conversely, Wildlife SOS asserts that its personnel were engaging in legitimate, high-risk anti-poaching intelligence work, warning that treating authorised informant and field operations as criminal networks would have a catastrophic chilling effect on Indian wildlife law enforcement.
The official, unedited position of the organisation is documented in the following verbatim statement released by Wildlife SOS:
"Will honour Court Order: Poaching Lobby Cannot Deter Us. Wildlife SOS has taken note of the order of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court recalling the interim protection earlier granted to our CEO and Co-founder, Kartick Satyanarayan, in connection with the ongoing investigation by the State Tiger Strike Force (STSF). We respect the order of the Hon'ble Court and will abide by its directions in full. Satyanarayan's writ petition sought only the basic, natural protection against coercive action available under law; its withdrawal is a procedural development and does not amount to a finding on the merits or a determination of guilt. We intend to extend our full cooperation to the concerned authorities in accordance with the date stipulated by the Hon’ble High Court, while simultaneously exploring and pursuing the available legal remedies before the said date. A Wildlife SOS spokesperson said: 'Wildlife SOS was compelled to seek protection in view of the concerns it has regarding the manner in which the investigation has been conducted by the STSF, which has already taken our colleague Wasim Akram into custody. Despite repeated requests through official and legal channels, a copy of the Forest Offence Report (FOR) is yet to be provided. Wildlife SOS and our staff are being vilified and harassed at the behest of the poaching lobby. This episode has only strengthened Satyanarayan's resolve - for over 30 years he has dedicated his life to protecting India's wildlife, and he remains committed to continuing this work unfettered.' Geeta Seshamani, Co-founder and Secretary, Wildlife SOS, added: 'In the four weeks since Wasim's detention, we have watched these developments with concern. We remain hopeful that the investigation will proceed fairly and transparently, and that the FOR and details of the charges will be shared through the appropriate legal channels. We are also concerned about how Kartick and Wildlife SOS have been portrayed in some quarters - the extensive media attention risks a trial by media before the facts have been examined through due process. We hope institutional influence and public clout will not be allowed to overshadow that process. Our focus remains on our work and on the animals in our care, and we place our faith in the law.' Wildlife SOS's legal spokesperson said: 'We are confident the investigation and the hearings before the Court will establish Satyanarayan's innocence and expose those behind this campaign to vilify Wildlife SOS. We will continue to cooperate fully with the investigating authorities and to pursue every remedy available to us in law.' As the matter remains sub judice, Wildlife SOS will refrain from commenting further on its merits and will allow the legal and investigative process to take its course. For any media queries, please contact Wildlife SOS."
The unfolding legal battle highlights the complex vulnerabilities faced by non-governmental conservation groups operating parallel to state enforcement agencies. While Wildlife SOS maintains that the procedural withdrawal of interim protection does not equate to an indicator of institutional guilt, the lack of transparency surrounding the Forest Offence Report remains a critical point of contention. The resolution of this sub judice matter will inevitably set a critical precedent for how undercover wildlife intelligence operations, whistle-blower mechanisms, and multi-state anti-poaching collaborations are regulated and protected under Indian environmental law.
Leave a comment