Shashwati Chowdhury
Published on: August 17, 2022 at 17:41 IST
The Kerala High Court has observed [Gaurav Tewari v. Union of India] that the steps being taken by the authorities to address human-animal conflicts in the state need to be expeditiously carried out.
Even though the guidelines created in this respect appear to be being implemented, a division bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly stated that more proposals and actions are needed to address the issue.
“In light of the above, in as much as the guidelines have been implemented and steps have been taken as stated supra, we only observe that the proposals and the action to be taken be expedited,” the Court stated.
A petition seeking both protection for forest-living animals and a directive to the government to take remedial measures to stop attacks on wild animals was being considered by the court.
The petitioner submitted that an incident from May 2020, in which a pregnant elephant died from injuries sustained after eating a pineapple stuffed with crackers, prompted him to contact the court.
It was contended that Article 51A Part IV A of the Indian Constitution imposes duties on every Indian citizen, including the State, to protect and preserve the nation’s wildlife.
It was said that numerous actions, including planting endemic species, building and maintaining check dams, digging water holes to retain water, eradicating exotic flora, and conserving soil and moisture, are being carried out to improve the habitats of wild animals.
Additionally, it was mentioned that 15 Rapid Response Teams are deployed in high-risk areas to chase away stray wild animals, particularly elephants.
It was also argued that compensation be given for deaths, injuries that result in handicaps, and other harm from attacks by wildlife, as well as to farmers for the loss or damage of 27 crops as a result of such assaults. In order to reduce conflicts between people and animals, several panchayaths bordering forests have organised 261 Jana Jagratha Samithies. It was informed.The Court commended the aforesaid actions but emphasised that they needed to move expeditiously