Ban night tourism, limit safaris: SC panel on tiger reserve mgmt
New Delhi An expert committee tasked by the Supreme Court to recommend steps for better management of tiger reserves in the country has proposed a complete ban on night tourism, recommended that the core and buffer zone be declared silent zones, and suggested providing arms and legal protection to forest officials, as part of a comprehensive overhaul in the management of these protected areas.
The report of the four-member committee, having experts drawn from National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA), Wildlife Institute of India (WII), the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the MOEFCC was submitted to the court last week. The committee also dealt with the issue of tiger safaris and said that remedying the illegal construction and felling of trees for the Pakhro tiger safari at Jim Corbett National Park would involve a restoration cost of nearly ₹30 crore. HT has reviewed a copy of the report.
The court on March 6, 2024 took serious note of the destruction caused to the environment due to the Pakhro safari, passing simultaneous directions to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to identify the officers responsible and asking the Union government to form a committee to propose the cost to be paid by the guilty officers, besides suggesting long term reforms for strengthening the ecosystem in tiger reserves.
The Supreme Court had banned the tiger safari after it was found that the Uttarakhand forest department had felled trees in the Pakhro range for constructing a tiger rescue centre, which was to also function as a safari for vehicles and pedestrian movement, without seeking mandatory environment ministry's approval. The court had also said that the proposed safari was in violation of Guidelines for Safari Parks.
Proposing that such tiger safaris only be established on 'non-forest land' or a 'degraded forest land in buffer zone that is not part of a tiger corridor' , the experts went by the court's suggestion to adopt an approach of 'ecocentrism' and not of 'anthropocentrism' (human-centric) and said: 'In order not to disrupt the circadian rhythm of wildlife, a complete ban on night tourism must be implemented in tiger reserves.'
The committee's members are Chandra Prakash Goyal, Member CEC, Vaibhav C. Mathur, Deputy Inspector General of Forests, NTCA, Qamar Qureshi, Scientist G, WII, Dehradun, and R. Raghu Prasad, Inspector General of Forests, Wildlife as Member Secretary.
The committee further proposed the entire area of tiger reserve and the eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) of protected areas that are part of it to be notified as 'silent zones' under Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.
In addition, it proposed that NTCA guidelines that recommended phasing out of night stay facilities for tourists in core areas of the reserve be enforced strictly and implemented in six months. It also proposed a ban on the use of mobile phones within tourism zones of the core habitat of tiger reserves.
Dealing with the Pakhro tiger safari, the committee estimated the potential ecological loss due to safari project to be about Rs.29.8 crores.
The amount , collected (from the guilty officials) should be put in a separate account to be maintained by Field Director, Corbett Tiger Reserve who will ensure activities for the upkeep of the tiger safari. The top court in March last year had allowed the safari to continue on the condition that only injured, rescued or orphaned cubs in the wild are to be kept there while rejecting the proposal to introduce zoo animals sourced from outside.
The committee supported the court's judgment .
The committee also focused on people it called 'invisible green soldiers' or forest personnel who guard the forests, protect wildlife, and face life-threatening situations from the timber mafia and poachers.
'Ensuring their welfare is crucial for protecting the environment and sustaining ecological balance,' the committee said in its report. It added that this required states to ensure vacancies in all levels in tiger reserves are filled up on priority, with a separate cadre for veterinarians and wildlife biologists, along with one for sociologists to engage with the fringe communities on an ongoing basis, that will help build a 'social fence' in protection of forests.
Noting serious gaps in the absence of legal protection to forest staff against organised criminal elements, the report said, 'At least 75% of such staff shall be provided with arms within a period of five years. States may also raise special forest battalions to be deployed in Tiger Reserves under the operational command of forest officers, as done in some states.'
It suggested that provisions of Section 218 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (that requires prior sanction to prosecute government servants) be applied to all forest officers and in the unfortunate event of death in the line of duty, 'ex-gratia on par with paramilitary forces should be provided.'
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai is expected to consider the report with its suggestions later this week. The court's March 2024 order came on a petition filed by environment activist and lawyer Gaurav Kumar Bansal .
The Pakhro project measuring 106 hectares was approved by NTCA in 2015, the Central Zoo Authority (CZA) in 2019 and forest clearances from the Union environment ministry in October 2020 and September 2021.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
3 hours ago
- NDTV
"Same-Sex Couple Can Very Well Form A Family": Madras High Court
Chennai: Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family. A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." "She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family. It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue. Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part," the court said. Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA jurisprudence, the court said, adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family. Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI partners. The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. (Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Same sex couples can constitute a family: Madras High Court
Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples , they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family. A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family. "It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life." In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue." Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part." Live Events Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence, the court said adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family. Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI+ partners. The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Drone survey in Aravalis under SC scanner reveals network of roads used by miners
Gurgaon: It wasn't just one road that helped miners carry illegally mined stones from Nuh's Basai Meo village to Rajasthan. A drone survey carried out for the first time in the area on Wednesday revealed two more inter-state roads – each stretching approximately 3km – that connect Basai Meo and Rawa in Haryana to Chhapra and Nangal villages in Rajasthan. This discovery was made days after the Supreme Court pulled up a senior Haryana official over illegal mining in Nuh and construction of a road built through protected Aravalis in Basai Meo. The anti-corruption bureau, which got involved in the investigation only last month, carried out the drone survey along with the forest department. "We have identified certain routes. We are in the process of verifying land use details. We plan to carry out more surveys if needed. Currently, the investigation is going on. Will submit our findings soon," said Anshu Singla, SP (ACB). A govt official involved in the probe told TOI that the two new roads, though just a few kilometres from the one on which a petition was filed in the Supreme Court, were not detected until now because the forest department had only conducted site inspections. "Previously, no such drone survey was conducted. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Also, the first road was discovered earlier as it lay within the forest department's jurisdiction. The two other routes do not fall under sections 4 and 5 of PLPA (Punjab Land Preservation Act, which restricts construction in Aravali forests), so the department had no prior knowledge of them," the official said. He added that monitoring the region is also problematic because of its rocky terrain. Since the state boundary crosses this area, it isn't obvious where Haryana ends and where Rajasthan begins, the official said. Miners misuse this feature because of the lack of uniformity in rules. Mining the Aravalis is banned in Nuh, but Rajasthan does not have any such prohibition. It was in Oct 2024 that a 6km road was carved through protected Aravali forests of Basai Meo. A month later, villagers filed a petition, alleging that this road allowed the mining mafia to quarry stones in nearby Rawa village of Nuh, and transport them to stone crushing units in Gadhaner, Rajasthan. Apparently unafraid, miners blasted a hillock in Rawa to pieces just weeks later, TOI had reported in Dec 2024. The forest department, which had started looking into the allegations, dug up trenches to block the road in Jan this year. It also ordered that an FIR should be registered against three revenue officials in Nuh for allowing this illegal construction. Meanwhile, the petition by Basai Meo villagers came up before SC, which directed the central empowered committee (CEC) to inspect the site. CEC, in its report, confirmed the violations and recommended action against erring officials. Last month, Haryana's chief secretary filed an affidavit that said the state's forest department did not act against violations. The top court disagreed, and in its latest hearing on May 29, it pulled up the chief secretary for "passing the buck" to the forest department and not taking action against other govt officials. "It appears that (mining) mafia is strong enough to protect not only its members but also the officers of the state govt who acted in collusion with them," Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said. But miners, it appears, are undeterred still. The road that was originally blocked by the forest department months ago had been rebuilt. On June 2, officials brought in earthmovers and blocked it again. "These unauthorised routes have long enabled the extraction and transportation of Aravali stones in violation of environmental regulations. We have repeatedly alerted the concerned departments about these roads. The matter is now in SC and it is being investigated by ACB," a senior forest official said. Nuh deputy commissioner Vishram Kumar Meena, asked about action in the case, said the former sarpanch of Basai Meo who was allegedly involved in this illegal construction was suspended under the Haryana Panchayati Raj Act. "We have taken the findings of the CEC very seriously. An illegal road passing through forest land cannot be tolerated. After preliminary inquiry and legal vetting, the sarpanch was suspended for dereliction of duty and enabling this environmental crime," Meena said.
