A Swift and Unprecedented Judicial Intervention
In a development of considerable significance, the Supreme Court of India on August 24, 2025, ordered the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to conduct a comprehensive inquiry into the functioning of Vantara (Greens Zoological Rescue and Rehabilitation Centre) at Jamnagar, Gujarat. Vantara, a 3,000-acre facility within Reliance’s refinery complex, is one of the world’s largest private wildlife projects, conceived by Anant Ambani and inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in March 2024.
The order came from a two-judge bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Prasanna B. Varale, acting on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by advocate C.R. Jaya Sukin. The petition made sweeping allegations against Vantara’s operations, ranging from illegal wildlife acquisition to financial irregularities. The Court candidly acknowledged that the PIL was “based only on allegations without supporting material” and would ordinarily not merit serious judicial time. Yet, it observed that the seriousness of the claims, coupled with the perception that statutory authorities were unwilling or incapable of discharging their mandate, warranted an impartial fact-finding exercise.
What makes this intervention particularly striking is the tight timeline: the SIT has been asked to present its report by September 12, 2025—barely three weeks to probe a project of such scale and complexity.
The SIT and Its Mandate
The investigation will be led by Justice J Chelameswar, retired Supreme Court judge renowned for his forthrightness and independence, particularly his role in the 2018 press conference where four senior judges publicly raised concerns about the judiciary’s functioning. He will be joined by:
• Justice Raghvendra Chauhan, former Chief Justice of Uttarakhand and Telangana High Courts
• Hemant Nagrale, IPS, former Mumbai Police Commissioner
• Anish Gupta, IRS, Additional Commissioner of Customs
The SIT has been tasked with examining:
• Acquisition of animals, particularly elephants, and compliance with the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, CITES, and import-export regulations.
• Operational standards, including veterinary care, mortality rates, and welfare practices.
• Broader allegations of smuggling, financial misreporting, misuse of biodiversity resources, and possible money laundering.
• Suitability of Jamnagar’s industrial zone climate for housing such large and varied collections of wildlife.
The SIT will be assisted by the Central Zoo Authority, the CITES Management Authority, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and the Gujarat Forest and Police Departments.
Vantara’s Scale and Controversy
Launched with much fanfare by the Prime Minister himself, Vantara has been projected as a world-class rescue and rehabilitation hub. Reliance Foundation claims it is home to over 200 elephants, more than 300 large cats, 3,000 herbivores, and 1,200 reptiles, in addition to thousands of birds. Independent investigations, however, suggest the numbers could exceed 39,000 animals from over 200 species, sourced from 32 countries through 53 exporters.
International scrutiny has intensified since early 2025. A German newspaper investigation alleged that the project may have indirectly fueled illegal wildlife trade, with significant inflows from the United Arab Emirates and South Africa. Animal rights groups in South Africa and Europe have questioned whether these were genuine rescues or thinly veiled commercial acquisitions.
In India, controversy has centred on elephant transfers. The case of Mahadevi (Madhuri), moved from a Jain math in Kolhapur to Jamnagar after a Supreme Court order, sparked protests by tens of thousands who demanded her return. Critics argue that state administrations failed in their duty, and some officers may have been compromised or pressured during transfers.
The Court’s Balancing Act
In framing its order, the Court was careful to underline that the SIT’s mandate is fact-finding, not accusatory. It stated explicitly that no adverse opinion is being expressed about Reliance Foundation or statutory authorities. At the same time, it noted that when allegations hint at the incapacity or unwillingness of authorities, judicial oversight becomes necessary to maintain public confidence.
That said, the compressed timeline for the SIT report raises concerns. Probing allegations of this scale—involving international animal trade, compliance with global treaties, and detailed mortality records—within less than three weeks appears a Herculean task. It suggests that the Court wants a preliminary, sharp factual snapshot before deciding whether to escalate into deeper proceedings.
Broader Context and Interpretations
The order also carries symbolic weight because Prime Minister Modi had personally inaugurated the facility. The SIT probe, therefore, places under judicial scrutiny a marquee project with both corporate and political associations.
The Court’s decision comes at a sensitive moment. In recent weeks, there have been high-profile Enforcement Directorate and CBI searches in unrelated cases, alongside developments in Anil Ambani’s SBI fraud account investigation. While the Supreme Court has been careful to note that no political undertones should be imputed to its order, public perception is bound to draw connections between the timing of enforcement actions, judicial oversight, and the Ambani family’s sprawling business empire.
Vantara’s Response
Vantara, commenting on the appointment of a SIT by the apex court, states that it 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 SIT and continue our work sincerely, always placing the welfare of animals at the heart of all our efforts," it says.
(Karan Bir Singh (KBS) Sidhu is a retired IAS officer and former Special Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab. He holds a Master’s degree in Economics from the University of Manchester, UK. He writes at the intersection of global trade negotiations, Trump-era tariff shocks, and contemporary geopolitics.)
