Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Snake Rescuer In King Cobra Controversy

The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case against a snake rescuer, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove he kept a king cobra in captivity or uploaded its photos online.

When the legal battle reached the bench, the accused snake rescuer defended his actions by maintaining that he neither harmed the king cobra nor uploaded any related photos or videos to social media. After examining the arguments from both sides, the court ultimately dismissed the entire case brought forward by the state government.

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed the ongoing criminal proceedings against snake rescuer Dr. P. Gowri Shankar. He had faced allegations of capturing a king cobra and keeping it in captivity while taking photographs of it. On November 2, Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde ordered the cancellation of the legal action initiated against him.

The High Court observed that the available allegations and materials failed to establish that the petitioner had kept the snake in confinement, injured or killed it, or uploaded any pictures to social media platforms. The case against Dr. P. Gowri Shankar originated from content posted online, in which he appeared within a video that had actually been uploaded by a third party.

Following the registration of a case under multiple provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, the petitioner moved to challenge the trial court proceedings. His defense argued that the chargesheet did not contain any proof that he hunted or captured the king cobra. Furthermore, the photographs presented by the state government showed the reptile in an open forest environment rather than under any form of captivity.

In contrast, the state government argued that the contents of the chargesheet indicated the petitioner allowed other individuals to photograph the king cobra, which ultimately led to the media uploads. However, the High Court noted that the state failed to substantiate its claim that the king cobra was actually captured by the petitioner himself.

The court pointed out that the photographs in question were sourced from social media rather than being recovered directly from the petitioner. It also took note of the fact that he had previously informed forest authorities on multiple occasions whenever he rescued king cobras. Consequently, the court ruled that the petitioner could not be held responsible for the alleged offenses and dismissed the matter entirely.

What this means for you
This judicial decision provides significant legal reassurance for wildlife rescue volunteers and environmental conservationists operating across the region.

• Across India: Wildlife rescuers operating under the framework of conservation laws will find legal clarity regarding third-party social media posts. The ruling establishes that mere appearance in online videos without active confinement proof does not constitute a punishable offense.
• In Karnataka: Local snake handlers and animal rescue workers gain protection from unwarranted criminal proceedings lacking substantive evidence of captivity. Maintaining proper communication logs with forest authorities serves as a reliable safeguard for field workers.

Why this happened
The legal dispute arose from questions over whether handling a wild animal and appearing in online media constitutes a violation of wildlife preservation statutes. The court examined the investigative findings and determined that the prosecution lacked conclusive evidence against the petitioner.

• Insufficient Proof: The state government failed to establish that the petitioner personally captured or physically confined the king cobra.
• Open Environment: Photographic evidence submitted with the chargesheet showed the snake roaming freely in a natural forest setting rather than in captivity.
• Prior Compliance: The petitioner had previously maintained a consistent record of informing forest officials about rescued reptiles, demonstrating lawful conduct.

Questions & Answers

1. Which high court heard this case?
The case was heard by the Karnataka High Court.

2. Who was accused in this legal proceeding?
Snake rescuer Dr. P. Gowri Shankar was the petitioner facing the criminal charges.

3. When did the judge issue the order?
Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde delivered the ruling on November 2.

4. Under which legislation was the case filed?
The case was filed under various provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.

5. Why did the court quash the case?
The court ruled that there was no evidence proving the petitioner kept the snake in captivity or injured it.

https://trendkia.com/en/karnataka/karnataka-high-court-quashes-criminal-case-against-snake-rescuer-in-king-cobra-controversy-59319
TrendKia — Har trend, sabse pehle.