6 months ago
2
The Supreme Court connected Tuesday (November 11, 2025) took beardown objection to an bid of the Uttarakhand High Court staying the State government’s authorisation to prosecute a erstwhile Director of the Corbett Tiger Reserve successful transportation with an ongoing Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into amerciable histrion felling and unauthorised operation for the Corbett Tiger Safari task successful the reserve’s buffer zone.
A Bench of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai and Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria said it was “amazed” astatine the High Court’s intervention, peculiarly erstwhile the CBI probe was being straight monitored by the apical court.
“...we are amazed astatine the attack of the High Court. The High Court should person astatine slightest perused the authorisation order, wherever a notation is made to our earlier orders. Time and again, we person said that the High Courts are not inferior to the Supreme Court. However, erstwhile connected the judicial side, the Supreme Court is seized of a matter, the High Court is expected to springiness owed respect to the proceedings earlier this Court,” the Bench observed.
The High Court, connected October 14, had stayed the State government’s bid issued a period earlier, granting authorisation to prosecute the 2004-batch Indian Forest Service serviceman Rahul, who goes by a archetypal name. The authorisation followed the Supreme Court’s earlier censure of the State for extending “special treatment” to the officer, who was appointed Director of the Rajaji Tiger Reserve contempt being nether suspension for his alleged relation successful irregularities related to histrion felling and unauthorised operation during his tenure arsenic Director of the Corbett reserve.
Earlier, the Bench had directed Mr. Rahul to look earlier it connected November 11 to explicate wherefore contempt proceedings should not beryllium initiated against him for moving the High Court contempt being alert that the substance was pending earlier the Supreme Court.
On Tuesday (November 11, 2025), the Bench expressed reservations implicit elder advocator R. Basant, appearing for Mr. Rahul, attempting to warrant his client’s conduct. “During the people of the hearings, a superior effort was made to warrant the behaviour of Mr. Rahul. However, it appears that communal consciousness prevailed during the luncheon recess and erstwhile the substance was called retired post-lunch, Mr. Basant, the Ld. counsel states that Shri Rahul has already tendered his unconditional apology,” the tribunal recorded successful its order.
During Tuesday’s (November 11, 2025) hearing, the Bench expressed reservations implicit elder advocator R. Basant, appearing for Mr. Rahul, initially attempting to warrant his client’s conduct. The court, however, noted that “better consciousness prevailed” during the recess, and that Mr. Rahul subsequently tendered an unconditional apology done his counsel.
‘Not appropriate’
The tribunal made it categorically wide that it was “not appropriate” for Mr. Rahul to person approached the High Court erstwhile the substance was pending earlier the Supreme Court. “If helium was of the sentiment that, connected relationship of immoderate of the orders oregon observations passed by this Court, his rights were prejudiced, helium could person sought due orders here,” it said.
Taking enactment of Mr. Rahul’s unblemished work grounds spanning implicit 2 decades, the Bench refrained from initiating contempt proceedings. While accepting his apology, the tribunal underscored that the existent majesty of instrumentality lies not successful retribution but successful restraint.
“This Court has ever held that the majesty of instrumentality lies not successful punishing, but successful forgiving. Shri Rahul is personally contiguous earlier the Court. It appears that, owing to improper ineligible advice, helium took the misguided measurement of approaching the High Court portion the substance was pending earlier this Court,” the Bench recorded successful its order. Accepting the officer’s unconditional apology, the tribunal directed that the proceedings pending earlier the High Court beryllium withdrawn and transferred to the Supreme Court.
The Bench was informed of the High Court’s bid by elder advocator K. Parmeshwar, who is assisting the tribunal arsenic amicus curiae. The single-judge Bench of Justice Ashish Naithani had granted interim alleviation to the 2004-batch officer, holding that the substance raised “significant questions” regarding the competence of the State authorities to reappraisal its earlier determination declining authorisation successful the lack of immoderate caller material.
“Since these issues onslaught astatine the precise basal of the maintainability of the prosecution, it would beryllium appropriate... to enactment the cognition of the impugned bid until specified questions are yet adjudicated,” the High Court had said. Accordingly, it had stayed the cognition of the September 16 authorisation bid until the adjacent hearing, portion calling for counter-affidavits from the State and the CBI wrong 4 weeks.
The Supreme Court was proceeding an exertion filed by advocator Gaurav Kumar Bansal, who had flagged the amerciable felling of astir 3,000 trees successful the Corbett Tiger Reserve without requisite permissions, and the operation of imperishable structures successful usurpation of the Wildlife Protection Act and the Forest (Conservation) Act.
In March 2024, the apex tribunal had ordered departmental proceedings against the delinquent officials and upheld a 2023 bid of the Uttarakhand High Court directing a CBI probe into the larger conspiracy. The CBI subsequently named 8 officials successful its investigation, including Mr. Rahul, the past Director of the Corbett Tiger Reserve and the senior-most among the accused.
On September 8, erstwhile the tribunal was informed that Mr. Rahul was the lone serviceman against whom the State had declined to assistance a authorisation to prosecute, it had accused the State authorities of “protecting” the officer.
