Supreme Court clears Vantara wildlife centre of violations after probe

The Supreme Court has delivered a resounding endorsement to Vantara, the expansive animal rescue and rehabilitation centre in Jamnagar, Gujarat, run by the Reliance Foundation. On 15 September, a bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale accepted the findings of a court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), which concluded that the facility had committed no violations of wildlife protection laws. 

Based on a sealed report submitted by the SIT led by retired Justice J Chelameswar, the ruling dismissed allegations of illegal animal acquisitions, mistreatment and improper transfers of elephants from temples and other sources. This decision brings closure to months of legal scrutiny that had drawn international attention, allowing Vantara to proceed with its mission on its 3,000-acre site, home to thousands of rescued animals worldwide. 

The court insisted that the probe was exhaustive, involved multiple agencie,s and urged against tarnishing the centre's reputation without evidence.

Supreme Court accepts SIT findings

In its order, the bench noted that the SIT's investigation revealed "no contravention of law" in Vantara's operations, including the procurement and care of animals. The report, kept confidential and resealed by the court, was summarised publicly to affirm compliance with the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and international conventions like the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). 

Justices Mithal and Varale highlighted that all animal transfers, including those of elephants from religious institutions, were conducted with proper permissions from state wildlife authorities and adhered to rehabilitation guidelines. 

The court also barred any future proceedings on similar complaints, effectively closing all pending cases and directing that no other judicial or quasi-judicial body entertain fresh allegations without new evidence.

The SIT, formed on 25 August in response to public interest litigations (PILs) filed by animal rights activists and conservation groups, included representatives from the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, the Central Zoo Authority and environmental experts. Over three weeks, the team inspected the facility, reviewed documentation for over 39,000 animals imported or rescued since 2022, and interviewed staff and veterinarians. 

The findings confirmed that enclosures met global standards, with animals receiving specialised care, including climate-controlled habitats and medical facilities rivalling human hospitals. 

The court praised Vantara's conservation efforts, noting its role in rehabilitating endangered species and its accreditation under the Global Humane Seal.

Background to the allegations

Vantara, founded by Anant Ambani, the youngest son of Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani, opened in February 2025 as a non-profit initiative under the Reliance Foundation. Spanning 3,000 acres within the Reliance Greens complex, it houses over 2,000 rescued animals, including lions, tigers, elephants and exotic species like gorillas and rhinos. 

The centre gained prominence for high-profile rescues, such as elephants from overcrowded temples and animals from conflict zones abroad. However, all hell broke loose when Prime Minister Narendra Modi paid a high-profile visit to the centre.

Inaugurated Vantara, a unique wildlife conservation, rescue and rehabilitation initiative, which provides a safe haven for animals while promoting ecological sustainability and wildlife welfare. I commend Anant Ambani and his entire team for this very compassionate effort. pic.twitter.com/NeNjy5LnkO

— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) March 4, 2025

Immediately, it faced backlash from activists who alleged circumvention of CITES restrictions, money laundering through animal trades and substandard welfare conditions. PILs filed in July 2025 cited reports from international media, including a joint investigation by Germany's Süddeutsche Zeitung and Venezuela's Armando Info, claiming Vantara imported banned species with governmental cover. 

Concerns arose over land use, too, with accusations of encroachment on forest areas and the ethics of relocating temple elephants, which some saw as disrupting cultural practices. 

These claims prompted the Supreme Court to intervene, appointing the SIT to ensure transparency and address public doubts. Vantara's management consistently denied wrongdoing, asserting all activities were vetted by authorities and aimed at global conservation.

Reactions to the ruling

The verdict has elicited mixed responses. Vantara welcomed it as a vindication, stating that "doubts and allegations have been cleared" and reaffirming its commitment to animal welfare. 

Anant Ambani expressed gratitude to the court and SI in a statementT, emphasising the centre's role in saving voiceless animals. 

Supporters on social media platform X hailed it as a triumph for philanthropy, with users like @superkin noting the clean chit aligns with Vantara's compliance record. Others, such as @sainidan_ratnu, praised Ambani's investment in rehabilitation over profit-making ventures, calling it a model of compassion.

Critics, however, questioned the confidentiality of the full SIT report. An activist who gained prominence as an influencer during the Anna movement of 2011, Raju Parulekar argued on X that sealing the document undermines public interest, turning PILs into "private interest litigations". Advocate Rajendra Koushik echoed this, decrying it as a "black spot" in the judiciary and suggesting undue influence from corporate giants. Some users, like @nag_vasireddy, noted disproportionate media coverage, speculating on promotional motives. While acknowledging the ruling, animal rights groups called for ongoing oversight to ensure sustained welfare standards.

Implications for wildlife conservation

This ruling sets a precedent for large-scale private conservation efforts in India, where wildlife protection often intersects with corporate and cultural interests. Vantara's clearance could encourage similar initiatives, bolstering India's biodiversity goals amid habitat loss and poaching threats. 

The centre's global partnerships, including with zoos in the US and Africa, may expand, facilitating species reintroduction programmes. 

However, the debate over transparency highlights tensions between judicial discretion and public accountability in environmental cases.

Experts suggest the verdict reinforces the Wildlife Protection Act's framework, stressing permits and audits for animal transfers. For Vantara, it means uninterrupted operations, including its elephant wellness programme and veterinary research. Such facilities could play a pivotal role, provided they maintain the high standards affirmed by the court.

The Supreme Court's decision not only absolves Vantara but also underscores the value of rigorous probes in dispelling unfounded claims. While some voices demand more openness, the ruling paves the way for continued conservation work, blending corporate resources with ethical stewardship.