Judgement Briefs

Environmental Law

Centre for Environmental Law, WWF-India v. Union of India - Asiatic Lion Case

(2013) 8 SCC 234

Citation
(2013) 8 SCC 234
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
15 Apr 2013
Bench
K.S. Radhakrishnan & C.K. Prasad, JJ.

Facts

  • The Asiatic lion survived as a single wild population concentrated in and around Gir National Park in Gujarat.
  • Conservation experts warned that keeping the entire species in one location exposed it to catastrophic risks such as:
  • epidemic disease;
  • forest fire;
  • natural disaster;
  • local ecological collapse.
  • The Wildlife Institute of India and expert committees identified Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary in Madhya Pradesh as a suitable second habitat.
  • Preparatory steps included:
  • relocation of villages;
  • habitat development;
  • prey-base improvement.
  • Gujarat opposed transfer of lions from Gir.
  • It questioned Kuno’s suitability and emphasised its own conservation success and connection with the species.
  • The dispute reached the Supreme Court after prolonged disagreement between the States and the Union Government.

Issue

  • Whether Asiatic lions should be translocated from Gujarat to establish a second wild population.
  • Whether a State could claim exclusive control over an endangered species located within its territory.
  • Whether species survival should be judged from an anthropocentric or ecocentric perspective.

Rule

  • Wildlife is a national natural heritage and not the exclusive property of a particular State.
  • Environmental adjudication should apply an ecocentric approach that considers the best interests and survival of the species.
  • The precautionary principle requires action against credible extinction risks before catastrophe occurs.
  • The Wildlife (Protection) Act and constitutional environmental duties require habitat-based species conservation.
  • Political pride and administrative ownership cannot override scientific conservation evidence.

Application

  • The Court accepted Gujarat’s successful conservation work in increasing the Gir lion population.
  • However, that success did not remove the risk created by geographical concentration.
  • A single disease outbreak or ecological disaster could affect the entire remaining wild population.
  • Establishing a second free-ranging population was therefore a form of biological insurance.
  • The Court rejected the idea that translocation would amount to Gujarat losing ownership of its lions.
  • Wild animals are not State assets comparable to commercial property.
  • They form part of the country’s shared ecological heritage.
  • The Court relied upon:
  • Wildlife Institute of India studies;
  • expert committee recommendations;
  • habitat and prey assessments;
  • international conservation principles.
  • Kuno had undergone substantial preparation and was considered capable of supporting a second lion population.
  • The Court adopted an ecocentric standard:
  • the decisive question was not which State gained prestige;
  • it was what arrangement best protected the species.
  • It also distinguished the proposed lion reintroduction from a separate plan to introduce African cheetahs into Kuno.
  • A new experimental project could not displace or compromise the scientifically established need for a second Asiatic lion home.
  • The Court therefore gave priority to the conservation plan developed specifically for the endangered native species.
  • Human rehabilitation associated with habitat preparation was also recognised as part of responsible conservation planning.

Conclusion

  • The Supreme Court directed the Ministry of Environment and Forests to take urgent steps to reintroduce Asiatic lions from Gir into Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary.
  • The implementation had to follow expert supervision and scientific protocols.
  • Gujarat’s objections based on State control or pride were rejected.
  • The Court held that the species’ long-term survival was the controlling consideration.
  • The African-cheetah proposal for Kuno could not be permitted to undermine the lion-reintroduction plan.
  • The judgment became a leading Indian statement of:
  • ecocentrism;
  • species best interest;
  • precautionary wildlife management;
  • rejection of State ownership over wildlife.
  • Use this case for: establishing a second habitat for an endangered species based on ecological necessity.