SC Slams Wildlife Law Violation
30 minutes ago
- copy link

The Supreme Court has strongly reprimanded YouTuber and influencer Elvish Yadav in the snake venom scandal. The court said that if a famous person disobeys the law and misuses wildlife, it will send a very wrong message to the society. The court clarified that in this case the complaint will be investigated under the provisions of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and it is necessary to see whether there has been a violation of the law.

According to India Today report, a bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundaresh and Justice N. Kotishwar Singh, was hearing the petition of Elvish in which he had challenged the charge sheet and this criminal action. The court said that if famous persons like you can use ‘speechless’ creatures like wild animals, it will give a wrong message to the society. The court also said that no one can arbitrarily do whatever he wants.
Senior advocate Mukta Gupta, counsel for Elvish Yadav, told the court that Yadav was neither the owner of the snake nor was he himself involved in any illegal activity. According to this, he was present only as a guest for a music video shoot, in which singer Fazilpuriya was also involved. He also said that the snakes did not have venom sacs and teeth, and claimed that the producers had obtained the necessary permissions.

At the same time, the administration said that the police have recovered possible poison including several snakes in this case, and it is also being investigated whether the poison was extracted illegally or they were misused. The court directed the prosecution to clarify whether the productions had taken all the necessary permissions or not.

Let us tell you that this case is related to the rave parties of Noida, where it is alleged that snakes and their venom were used as entertainment and intoxicant. FIR in this case was registered in November 2023 and Elvish Yadav also got bail. The court has directed to file a report for the next hearing of this case and this issue will be looked into in detail in the further hearing.
