Archive · 19 Sep 2026
Gauhati High Court Declines to Halt Transfer of Five Elephants
A court in Assam was asked to stop five elephants from being taken to temples in Tamil Nadu.
The elephants are privately owned and kept in captivity.
The court did not stop the transfer at this stage.
It said the transfer could continue if the required permissions had been obtained.
Assam’s lawyer said all the permissions were ready.
He also said the elephants would be transported with all possible care.
The person who filed the application worried that the elephants might be treated badly.
He referred to an earlier elephant case involving Joymala.
The court will look at the matter again on October 15.
The Gauhati High Court declined to stop five privately owned captive elephants from being transferred from Assam to temples in Tamil Nadu.
The court said no restraint was justified unless it was shown that the required statutory clearances had not been obtained.
Assam’s Additional Advocate General said all transfer clearances were granted and that every possible care would be taken during transportation.
Applicant Rohit Choudhury raised concerns about possible ill-treatment, citing the previous case of an elephant named Joymala.
The court kept the application pending and directed that it, along with the connected writ petition, be considered on October 15.
- Who
- The Gauhati High Court, Rohit Choudhury, the State of Assam, and five privately owned captive elephants are involved.
- What
- The court declined to restrain the proposed transfer of five elephants to temples in Tamil Nadu, while keeping the application pending.
- When
- The hearing took place on September 17, and the writ petition and application were directed to be considered on October 15.
- Where
- The case is before the Gauhati High Court; the elephants are to travel from Assam to temples in Tamil Nadu.
- Why
- The applicant cited possible ill-treatment, while the court found no basis for restraint unless the necessary statutory clearances were absent.
Applicant’s Concerns
State and Court’s Position
Whether the transfer should proceed
Applicant’s Concerns
Rohit Choudhury sought to stop the transfer, arguing that the elephants could face ill-treatment in Tamil Nadu and citing the earlier case of Joymala.
State and Court’s Position
The court found no present justification for a restraint order because the concern was not considered sufficient, particularly while required clearances had reportedly been obtained.
Regulatory clearances and safety
Applicant’s Concerns
The application challenged the legal framework governing the ownership, control, custody, and possession of captive elephants and sought protection for the animals.
State and Court’s Position
Assam’s Additional Advocate General said all clearances had been granted and that all possible care would be taken to transport the elephants safely for religious purposes.
Validity of the legal provisions
Applicant’s Concerns
The writ petition alleges that provisos to Sections 40(2A) and 40(2B) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act are arbitrary and violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
State and Court’s Position
The court has not finally decided that challenge; the writ petition remains under consideration, with the matter scheduled for October 15.
- Court
- Gauhati High Court
- Bench
- Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Arun Dev Choudhury
- Elephants involved
- Five privately owned captive elephants
- Proposed destination
- Temples in Tamil Nadu
- State position
- Assam said all transfer clearances had been granted and all possible care would be taken during transportation.
- Applicant
- Rohit Choudhury
- Next consideration
- October 15
- Related legal challenge
- The writ petition challenges provisos to Sections 40(2A) and 40(2B) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
