Where temple elephants are concerned, tradition must bend to constitutional values and statutory safeguards, the Madras High Court has held, directing the Tamil Nadu Government to frame a State-wide Standard Operating Procedure covering everything from microchip checks and travel limits to firecracker noise and spiked chains before captive elephants are paraded at religious festivals.
Chennai: The Madras High Court has directed the State Government to set up a Joint Working Group and place on record, within four weeks, a draft Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) regulating the participation of captive elephants in temple festivals and religious functions, on a writ petition filed by Seva Trust [Seva Trust v. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government and Others].
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, in a common order delivered on October 1, also dismissed two impleadment applications, one by the NGO People for Cattle in India (PFCI) and another by Suparna Ganguly, which sought to stall the inter-State transfer of five captive elephants from Assam to Tamil Nadu.
Tradition and the Constitution
Opening the order, the Chief Justice acknowledged the place elephants occupy in the State’s temple life, but made clear that custom alone cannot govern their use:
“However, the integration of captive animals into religious ceremonies cannot exist in a legal vacuum; scriptural traditions must strictly accord with constitutional values, statutory safeguards, and the fundamental duty enjoined upon the State and citizens under Article 51A(g) of the Constitution of India to show compassion to living creatures.”
The Bench noted that the custody, welfare and movement of captive elephants are already governed by the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, the Tamil Nadu Captive Elephants (Management and Maintenance) Rules, 2011, and the Captive Elephant (Transfer or Transport) Rules, 2024, which together lay down standards on veterinary care, shelter, transit and the maximum duration of continuous travel, and prohibit cruelty and hazardous exposure at public events.
Background of the case
Seva Trust, represented by its Managing Trustee Anuradha Subramanian, approached the High Court seeking a mandamus directing the State authorities to formulate and notify a State-wide SOP on the participation of elephants in religious functions and temple festivals, by considering its representation dated July 29, 2026. The Additional Chief Secretary (Environment, Climate Change and Forests), the Principal Secretary (HR&CE), the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, the Chief Wildlife Warden and the Commissioner of HR&CE were arrayed as respondents.
PFCI, through its founder G. Arun Prasanna, sought to be impleaded and asked the Court to refer the inter-State transfer of five elephants, Durga, Hiralal, Shiva, Rupsing and Bijuli, from Assam to Tamil Nadu to the High-Powered Committee constituted under the Supreme Court’s directions, and to restrain the authorities from moving the animals in the meantime. Suparna Ganguly’s application sought a bar on inter-State movement of elephants unless ownership records, microchip data and DNA entries on the Gajah Suchana app were produced and verified, and the High-Powered Committee had given prior approval.
Impleadment pleas rejected
The Court held that neither applicant was a necessary or proper party. All the relevant statutory authorities were already before it, and they were the custodians charged with regulating the welfare, transfer and maintenance of captive elephants, backed by administrative machinery, veterinary boards and enforcement mechanisms. Where public interest is fully represented by State functionaries, the Bench said, private bodies have no automatic right to be added under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure:
“To permit every private organization to enlarge the array of parties in a general policy petition would impermissibly broaden the judicial inquiry and convert a focused regulatory mandamus into an unmanageable adversarial arena.”
The Court was particularly critical of PFCI’s attempt to seek substantive interim relief on the five Assam elephants through an impleadment application, holding that an intervener cannot “hijack or graft independent substantive reliefs into a writ petition instituted by another party.” Anyone with an independent grievance about specific transfers, it said, must file separate proceedings. The dismissal, the Bench clarified, does not bar the applicants from pursuing their own remedies before the appropriate forum.
The Court also clarified that every transfer and transportation of captive elephants within or across the State remains subject to the Supreme Court’s directions, including the parameters set for the High-Powered Committee, and that the SOP it was ordering is purely supplementary to those orders and to central law.
What The SOP For Temple Elephants Must Cover
To harmonise the 2011 State Rules with the 2024 Transfer or Transport Rules, the Court directed the respondents to constitute a Joint Working Group of the Chief Wildlife Warden, the Commissioner of HR&CE and expert veterinary officers. The SOP it drafts must provide, among other things, for mandatory veterinary fitness certificates, physical inspection and microchip or DNA verification before any festival permission is granted; registration and prior clearance from the District Level Committees; limits on travel duration, compulsory rest intervals, veterinary support in transit and specialised vehicles; decibel limits on loudspeakers and firecrackers, safe buffer zones between elephants and crowds, and a bar on displaying elephants close to pyrotechnics; and verification of qualified mahouts along with a strict prohibition on heavy tethering, spiked chains and any form of physical cruelty.
Until the SOP is finalised and notified, the Court directed strict compliance with the Wild Life (Protection) Act and the rules under it:
“Any violation of animal welfare standards or unapproved transportation during the pendency of these proceedings shall be met with immediate statutory action by the Chief Wildlife Warden and the enforcement authorities.”
The State Government and the official respondents have been directed to place the draft SOP on record within four weeks. The writ petition will next be listed on October 30, 2026.
Case Title: Seva Trust v. The Additional Chief Secretary to Government and Others [W.P. No. 30528 of 2026 and W.M.P. Nos. 42049 and 42178 of 2026]
Bench: Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, Madras High Court
Date of Order: October 1, 2026
For the Petitioner: V. Raghavachari and S. Prabakaran, Senior Advocates, for V.R. Shanmuganathan
For the Respondents: Mohammed Fayaz Ali, Special Government Pleader (Forest); S. Seenivasan, Government Advocate; R. Bharanidharan, Special Government Pleader (HR&CE)
For PFCI: T. Mohan, Senior Advocate, for Aishwarya S. Nathan
For Suparna Ganguly: Suhrit Parthasarathy for Aishwarya Vaidialingam