Corbett Tiger Reserve.
Credit:X@CorbettTourism
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Centre, the Uttarakhand government, and others on a plea seeking lifting of 2018 stay into the CBI investigation ordered into alleged poaching of tigers in Corbett tiger reserve.
A bench of Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria sought response also from D S Khati, a retired Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Wildlife) & Chief Wildlife Warden of the State.
The apex court had on October 22, 2018 suspended the Uttarakhand High Court's interim order of September 4, 2018 for the probe by the central agency on a PIL.
Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora and advocate Govindjee contended that there was a suppression of material facts before the court and the CBI investigation revealed the involvement of the very officer who got the stay from this court.
Khati's counsel, however, countered the allegations saying these were highly prejudicial remarks against the officer. She said the application for lifting the stay was filed recently and she should be granted time to file a response.
The court then issued notice, seeking response from the state and the central government, the CBI and others.
The applicant pointed out the High Court had passed its order in 2012 PIL raising the grievance that private resort owners and others had encroached upon forest land and undertaken illegal constructions within forest areas.
During the pendency, issue regarding large-scale tiger poaching in Corbett national park also got highlighted. In December 2015, Nepal Police arrested two accused persons, Ram Dayal and Raju, residents of Haryana, and seized a tiger skin at Itahari, District Sunsari, Nepal, it stated.
The applicant claimed, in another writ petition, it was specifically
alleged Khati, the then Chief Wildlife Warden of Uttarakhand, in collusion with Dr Sameer Sinha, the then director, Corbett National Park, destroyed material evidence and misled the government to protect the perpetrators of tiger poaching.
The plea also contended that the direction for a preliminary inquiry by the CBI was passed by the High Court only after perusing the entire record, including the technical reports of the Wildlife
Institute of India, the report of the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, and the communication of June 28, 2018 issued by the Head of Forest Force, Uttarakhand.
"All of which clearly indicated accountability of senior forest officials including the petitioner himself and the transnational as well as interstate nature of network of tiger poaching involved in the matter," it contended.