State Mandated to Strictly Implement Coordinated Action Plans for Preventing Wildlife Poaching and Electrocution

The High Court of Chhattisgarh took suo motu cognizance of a news report dated November 10, 2024, regarding the discovery of a tiger carcass in the Guru Ghasidas National Park, where poaching and "revenge killing" via poisoning were suspected.

Subsequent news reports in March 2025 highlighted further tiger and leopard deaths in Surajpur and Khairagarh, where carcasses were found with missing canines and claws, indicating organized poaching and electrocution.

Despite previous state assurances, the Court noted the gravity of recurring incidents and directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest-cum-Wild Life Warden (PCCF) to file a detailed affidavit outlining steps taken to preserve wildlife.

The PCCF submitted an affidavit on January 21, 2026, detailing various anti-poaching initiatives, inter-state coordination, and inter-departmental safety measures.

1. Whether the State had implemented adequate preventive and enforcement measures to curb illegal wildlife poaching, specifically through electrocution and snaring?

2. Whether there is an effective inter-departmental and inter-state framework to ensure the protection of wildlife corridors and the prosecution of offenders?

The Court primarily monitored compliance under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, focusing on the state's statutory duty to protect endangered species and prosecute wildlife offenses.

It emphasized the principles of Environmental Jurisprudence and State Accountability, requiring coordinated action between the Forest, Police, and Electricity departments to prevent "electrocution-based poaching".

The court also relied on the procedural framework for Public Interest Litigation to oversee executive action in the absence of adequate wildlife protection.

The State demonstrated the execution of "Anti-Snare Walks" covering 5,726 km, which led to the seizure of prohibited hunting equipment and live electric wires.

The Court noted the institutionalization of inter-departmental "safety teams" with the Electricity Department, which resulted in the rectification of 1,781 "loose wire" locations to mitigate electrocution risks.

The Court evaluated the efficacy of inter-state coordination with Odisha to share intelligence on poaching gangs, ensuring that offenders could not evade law enforcement by crossing borders.

The analysis highlighted that the State had begun fixing accountability on field officers for negligence, such as the suspension of a Beat Guard following a leopard poaching incident.

By integrating technology like drone surveillance and sniffer dog squads, the State addressed the technical gaps in traditional patrolling.

The Court held that the multi-disciplinary approach—encompassing capacity-building workshops, ground patrolling, and community outreach—was a necessary standard for mitigating poaching.

The Court directed the Forest Department to ensure "strict compliance" with the submitted action plan and ordered the respondent authorities to take all adequate steps to conserve tigers, elephants, and other wildlife in the State.