The Supreme Court has directed the Kerala Government to take over the custody of a captive elephant named Raman and house it in an appropriate rescue or rehabilitation centre, observing that courts "cannot be a mute spectator" when it comes to the welfare of voiceless animals.

A Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma passed the order while holding a Kerala resident guilty of contempt of court for violating an undertaking given before the Court that the elephant would not be used for temple or commercial activities pending adjudication of a custody dispute.

"It is truly unfortunate that the elephant in question, Raman, who also happens to be the tallest elephant in the State of Kerala, has been subjected to commercial exploitation despite an order restraining such exploitation, that too on the strength of an undertaking made before this Court. We would be failing in our duty towards the voiceless, if we turn a blind eye towards such defiance. We cannot be a mute spectator, more so in matters pertaining to voiceless animals, whose wellbeing is also of paramount importance," the Court observed.

The contempt proceedings arose out of a long-running dispute over the custody and ownership of Raman. Jayakrishna Menon claimed that the elephant belonged to Mata Amritanandamayi Mutt and had only been temporarily entrusted to Krishnankutty for upkeep, whereas the latter asserted ownership based on gift deeds executed in 2017. The issue of interim custody is presently pending before the Supreme Court in criminal appeals arising from proceedings before the Kerala courts.

During the pendency of the appeals, the Supreme Court had on August 6, 2025 directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests or the senior-most wildlife conservation officer in Kerala to inspect the elephant and report on its health and well-being. On the same day, counsel for Krishnankutty undertook before the Court that Raman would not be used for any commercial or temple activities.

However, a report submitted by State authorities revealed that when a detailed inspection was finally conducted on February 3, 2026, the elephant had been brought to Chavakkad for participation in a temple festival ceremony. The Court also noted that Krishnankutty admitted in written submissions that Raman had been taken to a temple ritual after another elephant scheduled for the event fell ill. While he claimed that the elephant's presence was only to satisfy religious sentiments and not for commercial exploitation, he tendered an unconditional apology in case the act was perceived as violating the Court's orders.

Rejecting the explanation, the Court held that the elephant had indeed been used in temple-related activities in breach of the undertaking recorded by the Court. It observed that Raman had been taken out and used for ceremonial processions and rituals despite the restraint order.

Taking note of the violation and prioritising the elephant's welfare, the Court directed the State of Kerala to assume custody of Raman and place it in a suitable rescue or rehabilitation facility. The Bench clarified that the arrangement would be temporary and subject to the final outcome of the pending appeals concerning interim custody. The State was also permitted to care for the elephant at its own expense in accordance with the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

Holding Krishnankutty guilty of contempt, the Court imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 and directed him to deposit the amount within four weeks. At the same time, it discharged the State authorities from the contempt proceedings, noting that they had made efforts to conduct the elephant's medical examination but were initially unable to do so because the animal remained in musth.

Case: Jayakrishna Menon v. Krishnankutty & Ors.

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 613

Click here to read the order

Appearance:

For the Petitioner: Mr. A. Karthik, AOR; Mr. C. Unnikrishnan, Ms. Smrithi Suresh, Mr. Sugam Agrawal, Ms. Veera Mahuli and Ms. Nanditha S., Advocates.

For the Respondents: Mr. Krishnamohan K., AOR; Ms. Prerna Jain Kala, Ms. Jeevlin Jiji and Ms. Dania Nayyar, Advocates; and Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR, along with Mrs. Anu K. Joy, Mr. Alim Anvar, Mr. Santhosh K. and Mrs. Devika A. L., Advocates.