In less than a month, India’s highest court cleared the country’s largest private zoo of all wrongdoing—without making the full investigation public. The Supreme Court on September 15, 2025, accepted a sealed report from its Special Investigation Team (SIT) that found “no contravention of law” at the Vantara facility in Jamnagar, Gujarat, while barring future complaints on the same issues.

Lightning-fast justice in a sea of pending cases

The Supreme Court wrapped up the Vantara case in just 32 days—from the August 14 first hearing to the September 15 final order. This swift resolution stands in stark contrast to the court’s backlog of over 88,400 pending cases, some lingering for decades.

The bench, headed by Justice Pankaj Mithal alongside Justice P.B. Varale, constituted a four-member SIT chaired by former Supreme Court Justice J. Chelameswar on August 25. The team submitted its report on September 12, which the court considered just three days later.

“We have no hesitation in accepting the report,” the bench stated while pronouncing the order that completely exonerated the zoo.

Behind closed doors: The sealed investigation

The full SIT report remains confidential. Only a summary was made public, while a complete copy was shared with Vantara’s management—not with the petitioners who raised the allegations.

When questioned about this secrecy during proceedings, the court cited commercial sensitivity concerns raised by Vantara’s counsel. This decision follows Supreme Court Rules, 2013 (Order XIII Rule 7), which allows for sensitive material to be submitted in sealed covers.

The petitioners, who originally raised concerns about animal welfare and regulatory compliance, were left with only the public summary while being barred from filing future complaints.

What the investigation covered

According to available information, the SIT examined Vantara’s compliance with:

• Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
• Recognition of Zoo Rules and Central Zoo Authority guidelines
• Customs regulations and Foreign Trade policies
• Prevention of Money Laundering Act
• CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species) compliance
• Animal welfare and husbandry standards
• Breeding and conservation practices
• Climate suitability for housed species
• Financial and trade aspects

The SIT coordinated with multiple agencies including the Central Zoo Authority, Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, CITES Management Authority of India, CBI, Enforcement Directorate, and Directorate of Revenue Intelligence.

Questions linger about transparency

The court’s decision to keep the SIT report sealed while sharing it with Vantara raises questions about procedural fairness. The petitioners now face a significant hurdle—they can’t file new complaints about issues that might be detailed in parts of the report they haven’t seen.

Wildlife law experts point out that the SIT conducted what the court termed a “fact-finding” mission rather than a formal investigation. This distinction means the team relied heavily on documents and submissions from the very agencies whose oversight was being questioned.

International reporting, including from Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung, has raised questions about connections between Vantara and UAE-based animal facilities like Kangaroo Animal Shelter and Capital Zoo Wildlife Park, with concerns about high volumes of animal transfers. The SIT summary reportedly accepted submissions from these entities.

“World-class facility,” says Vantara

Following the verdict, Vantara issued a statement welcoming the decision: “This validation confirms what we have maintained from the beginning—our facilities exceed prescribed standards and our conservation work follows all legal requirements.”

The facility, backed by the Reliance Group, has positioned itself as a conservation center housing thousands of animals including elephants, big cats, and numerous exotic species.

What happens next?

The petitioners may file a miscellaneous application seeking access to the sealed SIT report’s measures section. Alternatively, they could request certified copies of the August 25 and September 15 orders to better understand the court’s reasoning.

The case highlights the broader debate about private zoos, wildlife conservation, and judicial transparency in India. With the full investigation report sealed and future complaints barred, the public may never know all details behind the Supreme Court’s rapid clearance of Vantara.

For now, the court has effectively closed the book on allegations against what has been billed as the world’s largest private zoo, leaving questions about sealed-cover justice in its wake.

The article discussed the Supreme Court’s handling of the Vantara zoo case, the Special Investigation Team report, and the court’s decision to keep the report confidential while clearing the facility of wrongdoing.