The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Kerala government for failing to place on record the steps taken to safeguard Uttoly Raman — the state’s tallest captive elephant, since it ordered the animal’s custody to be transferred to the state in June, directing authorities to produce his latest medical examination report on October 12.
“It is a wonderful argument to make. “This is just a ploy. The court also directed the state to ensure that Krishnankutty was not allowed to touch the elephant. The state informed the court that it had a medical report from June. Rejecting the explanation, the bench had held at the time that the court could not turn a blind eye to the exploitation of an animal that could not speak for itself.
A bench of justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu questioned the state’s claim that it had taken custody of the elephant soon after the June 9 order, asking why the fact had not been disclosed in its affidavit and why the court had been kept in the dark about the steps taken to ensure the animal’s welfare. On June 9, the Supreme Court, while dealing with the dispute, ordered the Kerala government to take over the elephant’s custody and ensure his welfare, holding that the caretaker had violated a solemn undertaking given to the court on August 6, 2025, that the animal would not be used for religious or commercial activities. It found Krishnankutty guilty of contempt and imposed a fine of ₹ 2,000, while directing the state to take over Raman’s custody and place him in an appropriate rescue or rehabilitation facility.
Because there were elections?” retorted the court, expressing displeasure over what it described as an attempt to avoid compliance with its directions, so, the Supreme Court order is not to be complied with all these months.
The state does not want to comply,” the bench said, questioning why Raman had been allowed to remain in the custody of his caretaker, Krishnankutty, despite the court’s direction to transfer him to the state. When the state’s counsel said the elephant was already in government custody, the bench asked when the transfer had taken place and why the fact had not been mentioned in the affidavit.
Questioning whether the elephant had undergone any medical examination since then, the bench directed the government to produce the latest report at the next hearing.
