The Madhya Pradesh High Court has withdrawn legal protection for Kartick Satyanarayan, co-founder and CEO of the wildlife group Wildlife SOS, ruling that he failed to cooperate with an investigation into the alleged poaching of 10 leopards.
Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta of the Gwalior Bench issued the order on September 7. The order was uploaded on September 10. The judge said Satyanarayan “has not approached this Court with clean hands” and had obtained his earlier protection “without full disclosure of vital records and circumstances.”
The court ordered Satyanarayan to appear before the Madhya Pradesh Forest Department’s State Tiger Strike Force on September 21 and cooperate with investigators.
What The Investigation Alleges
The case began July 23, when police arrested four men on the Gwalior-Agra highway carrying 10 leopard skins. Wildlife SOS said at the time that the seizure followed months of surveillance by the group’s own anti-poaching unit.
Investigators traced the skins back to Madhya Pradesh and opened a separate inquiry into the alleged killings. Officials say the leopards were hunted in the Kuno, Sheopur and Morena forest divisions, an area that also hosts India’s reintroduced cheetah population.
The forest department says 15 people have been arrested across Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi.
Two of them, Bhagwan Singh, described by officials as a wildlife trader linked to Wildlife SOS, and Wasim Akram, a director at the group, allegedly named Satyanarayan during questioning.
Samita Rajora, the state’s principal chief conservator of forests for wildlife, said the department holds strong digital evidence tying the accused to the group.
She also questioned why Wildlife SOS did not alert authorities earlier if the group had no role in the killings.
“Why did they wait for a year for action against them?” Rajora said. “More revelations will be made on their involvement. But this was done to raise funds.”
Wildlife SOS has rejected the allegations. The organisation says its personnel were involved in anti-poaching intelligence work and helped authorities expose the alleged poaching operation.
In its September 10 statement, Wildlife SOS said it was concerned about how the investigation had been conducted and said its staff had been portrayed as perpetrators rather than people who helped expose wildlife crime.
Geeta Seshamani, co-founder and secretary of Wildlife SOS, said the media attention had moved ahead of the legal process.
“The extensive media attention risks a trial by media before the facts have been examined through due process,” Seshamani said. “We hope institutional influence and public clout will not be allowed to overshadow that process.”
The organisation said it has records and evidence to counter the allegations. It also said it would continue to cooperate with the investigation.
Why The Court Withdrew Protection
Satyanarayan had gone to court seeking to quash two summonses, dated August 14 and August 19, along with the underlying offence report.
His lawyers argued that Wildlife SOS staff had helped Uttar Pradesh officials make the original seizure and that Madhya Pradesh could not run a second investigation into the same incident.
On September 2, the court barred the State Tiger Strike Force from taking coercive action against Satyanarayan and allowed him to attend questioning with a lawyer present.
The state then asked the court to reverse that order. It said Satyanarayan had not disclosed a third summons issued on August 24 and an arrest warrant issued on August 31 after he failed to appear.
The department’s September 10 statement called him an “absconding accused.”
Prosecutors also challenged his stated reason for not appearing: that he was caring for his ailing mother in Hyderabad. Investigators told the court a hospital confirmed she had been discharged on August 6 and that Satyanarayan had not visited her there.
The state also argued that the Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh cases are not duplicates. The Agra case deals with possession and transport of the skins, officials said, while the Madhya Pradesh probe covers the alleged original hunting and those who allegedly facilitated it.
The court accepted the distinction and recalled the earlier protection.
Wildlife SOS Says It Will Follow Court Order
Wildlife SOS said on September 10 that it would comply with the High Court’s direction while pursuing other legal remedies.
The organisation said Satyanarayan’s writ petition sought protection from coercive action and that withdrawing the interim relief did not amount to a finding of guilt.
A Wildlife SOS spokesperson said the organisation had sought court protection because of concerns over the investigation. The spokesperson also said a copy of the Forest Offence Report had not been provided despite repeated requests.
“Wildlife SOS and our staff are being vilified and harassed at the behest of the poaching lobby,” the spokesperson said.
The organisation’s legal spokesperson said it expected the court proceedings and investigation to establish Satyanarayan’s innocence.
“We are confident the investigation and the hearings before the Court will establish Mr. Satyanarayan’s innocence,” the spokesperson said.
Wildlife SOS said it would continue to cooperate with investigating authorities and pursue the legal remedies available to it.
The underlying petition remains pending before the High Court and is due to be listed for admission after four weeks. Satyanarayan is required to appear before the State Tiger Strike Force on September 21.
Support Us To Sustain Independent Environmental Journalism In India.
More Ground Reports
He Was Married as a Child, Now Manish Dangi Helps Stop It for Others
Despite The Ban, How Gutkha Became MP’s Most Common Household Habit
