New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday quashed criminal proceedings against YouTuber Elvish Yadav in a case alleging use of snake venom in video shoots and involvement in drug-fuelled rave parties, holding that the FIR was legally unsustainable. At the same time, the court made it clear that its order does not amount to a clean chit, granting liberty to competent authorities to initiate separate proceedings under the Wildlife (Protection) Act. Elvish Yadav was booked in 2023 and arrested in 2024 for alleged use of snake venom at a rave party.
The bench of justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh confined its scrutiny to two specific questions — the applicability of provisions under the NDPS Act, 1985, and the validity of proceedings under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. On both counts, the court found the case, as presently instituted, to be legally untenable.
ALSO READ | ED attaches properties worth over ₹58 lakh of Elvish, Fazilpuria
Dealing first with the NDPS Act, the bench noted that the alleged substance recovered from a co-accused did not fall within the schedule of psychotropic substances under the law. “Admittedly, what is recovered from the co-accused cannot come within the purview of psychotropic substances found in the schedule,” noted the court.
It also took note of the submission that no recovery was made from Yadav, who was represented by advocate Raman Yadav, with the prosecution case resting largely on allegations that he had placed orders through an associate. In the absence of any scheduled substance and without direct recovery from the accused, the court held that invocation of the NDPS Act could not be sustained.
ALSO READ | Pankit Thakker: I am perplexed to see Elvish Yadav’s social media influence
On the Wildlife Protection Act aspect, the bench found a more fundamental legal flaw. It underscored that Section 55 of the Act mandates that prosecution can be initiated only upon a complaint filed by a duly authorised officer. In the present case, however, the complaint that led to registration of the FIR was filed by Gaurav Gupta, associated with the NGO People For Animals, and not by a competent statutory authority.
“We find that Section 55 of the Act requires a complaint by an authorised authority,” said the bench, holding that the FIR, in its current form, was not maintainable in law. The court also recorded doubts regarding the complainant’s bona fides and noted that related IPC allegations stemmed from an earlier complaint that had already been closed.
ALSO READ | Elvish Yadav assault case: Gurugram court grants bail to Bigg Boss OTT 2 winner
Having found the proceedings legally flawed on these grounds, the court quashed the FIR. However, it clarified that it had not examined the underlying allegations on merits. “We are not going to give a clean chit… If he has committed something, it has to be dealt with,” remarked the bench, as the it granted liberty to the competent authority to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.
The case arises from allegations that Yadav misused snakes and snake venom during a YouTube video shoot and was involved in organising rave parties where intoxicating substances were consumed.
The court had during a previous hearing in February expressed concern over the alleged handling of snakes, warning that allowing such conduct by a popular figure would send a “very bad message” and emphasising the strict safeguards under wildlife protection laws. At the time, the court had questioned whether any permission could legally be granted for the use of snakes in video shoots, particularly for extraction of venom, and directed the Uttar Pradesh government to verify the nature of permissions claimed by Yadav and his associates.