Alld HC junks Elvish Yadav's plea against chargesheet in snake venom case

Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court on Monday dismissed YouTuber Elvish Yadav's petition against the chargesheet filed in the FIR against him for alleged misuse of snakes and snake venom for making YouTube videos.

The allegations against him also include organising rave parties and calling foreigners who make people consume snake venom and other intoxicating drugs.

Justice Saurabh Srivastava dismissed his petition after orally observing that there are statements in the chargesheet and in the FIR against Yadav and that the veracity of such allegations will be tested during the trial. The court also noted that Yadav had not challenged the FIR in the petition.

While appearing for Yadav, senior advocate Navin Sinha argued that the person who filed the FIR against Yadav was not competent to file it under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. He also contended that neither Yadav was present at the party, nor anything was recovered from him.

Additional advocate general Manish Goyal submitted that it was found during investigation that Yadav had supplied snakes to the people from whom recovery was made.

After hearing both sides, the court dismissed the petition, effectively leaving it for the trial court to investigate the allegations.

A charge sheet has been filed in the FIR lodged against Elvish Yadav under various sections of the Wildlife Protection Act, Indian Penal Code and NDPS Act in Gautam Budh Nagar district. Subsequently, summoning order was issued by the (first) additional chief judicial magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar.

In the present petition, Elvish Yadav challenged the chargesheet and proceedings on the grounds that the informant was not a competent person to lodge FIR under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. It was also pleaded that no snakes, narcotic or psychotropic substances were recovered from the applicant. He also pleaded that no causal link had been established between the applicant and other co-accused.

Elvish Yadav further pleaded that the informant was no longer an animal welfare officer, but he filed the FIR showing himself to be one.

He also pleaded that he was an influencer and appeared in multiple reality shows on television and inevitably his involvement in the FIR garnered media attention. Consequently, influenced by the aforesaid attention, the police officials also attempted to further sensitize the matter by invoking Sections 27 and 27A NDPS Act immediately after arresting the applicant, the petition said.