The Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court comprising ofChief Justice (Acting) Mr. Arup Kumar Goswami and Justice Manish Choudhurydisposed of the PIL seeking intervention of the High Court in regard to thedecision of the State Government taken to transport on lease for six monthsfour elephants from Tinsukia in upper Assam to Ahmedabad in Gujarat forparticipating in the Annual Rath Yatra festival to be held from 4th of July,2019.
The Division Bench by order dated 25.06.2019 (Tuesday)expressed that it is ill-fit to make any comment as to in what manner theelephants are to be transported. But, before any such steps are taken therelevant circumstances have to be taken into consideration in mind as thesafety of the elephants is of paramount importance and this aspect has to beconsidered and be left to the experts.
Therefore, this obligation was passed by the Division Benchto the Principal Chief Conservator (Wildlife) and Chief Wild Life Warden,Assam. Apparently, in passing the order granting permission it is not indicatedthat the heat-wave aspects have been considered.
Whether, it was necessary to take into consideration at thatpoint of time, the Court expressed no comments, but, since the issue has beenraised in the PIL , the Division Bench is of the opinion that the Chief WildLife Warden, Assam shall pass a fresh order considering all aspects of thetransport of the elephants.
The AdditionalAdvocate General, Assam submitted that Air Conditioned wagons for the transportof the elephants are not available as communicated to him by the StandingCounsel, Railway Department. Therefore, the Division Bench directed that freshorders may be passed on or before 27.06.2019 and the copy of the said order befurnished to Mr. Bhaskar Dev Konwar, Senior Advocate for the petitioners on theday itself of passing of the order.
Mr. Bhaskar Dev Konwar, Senior Advocate appearing on behalfof the petitioners has submitted before this Court that the order dated04.05.2016 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court directing that the persons whoare in possession of the elephants shall not transfer the elephants outside theState nor shall they part with the elephants by way of their transfer in any manner.
Accordingly to Mr. Konwar, the Chief Wildlife Warden whilegranting the permission did not consider this aspect of the matter and furtherfrom the order of the Chief Wildlife Warden it also does not reflect that thedistance to be covered and the prevailing heat-wave conditions was not takeninto consideration.
Therefore this order is a result of total non-application ofmind. The Addl. Advocate General of Assam had submitted that the concernedauthority for passing orders for transportation of the elephants was alive ofthe order of the Supreme Court though not mentioned in the order and thissubmission is based on the interaction of with the concerned officer with theirCounsel(s).
The Asst. Solicitor General of India submitted before theCourt that though he asked for instruction from the concerned authorities ofthe Union of India, it was orally communicated to him that some instruction islikely to be sent to the State Government. Standing Counsel Railway has alsosubmitted that, it has come to the notice of the Railway authorities that theSupreme Court had passed an order restricting transport of animals from oneState to another. In this regard the Railways sought clarification from theForest Department, but since no response was received the Railways had decidedto keep the Transit Permits on hold. In the attending facts and circumstanceshaving regard of the submission of all the parties and available materials. TheCourt was of the opinion that the interim order of the Supreme Court ought to havebeen reflected in the order of the Chief Wild Life Warden.
Ever since, the Chief Wild Life Warden of Assam granted thepermission by separate orders issued on 12th, 13th & 14th June, 2019fortransporting four juvenile elephants namely, Joytara (female, Babulal(male),Rupsingh(male) and Rani (female) from Tinsukia to Gujarat for religiouspurposes, animal rights activists of the State have been protesting suchtransfers as they will be exposed to extreme heat conditions over several dayswhich would be gruelling and perilous to the elephants and would subject themto unnecessary pain and suffering and the same is therefore, cruelty to animalswithin the meaning of section 11(d)(e) and (f) of the Prevention of Cruelty toAnimals Act, 1960. Under such circumstances the PIL was filed by two animalrights activists of the State Ms. Nandini Baruah and Ms. Urmi Mala Das.
The animal rights activists have expressed their opinionthat it will be now interesting to see whether the Chief Wildlife Warden, Ms.Ranjana Gupta, in the attending facts and circumstances will continue with theprocess of transporting the juvenile elephants to Jagannath Temple, which hasthe poorest record in elephant management.
