The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark judgment affirming the rights of tribal communities and forest dwellers within areas declared as Wildlife Sanctuaries. The Court ruled that their rights, protected under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (WPA) and the Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA), remain valid even after an area is designated as a sanctuary. This decision comes as the court banned mining activities within a 1 km radius of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries, recognising the potential harm to wildlife.
A two-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, stated that specific sections of the WPA and FRA “amply protect the rights of the tribals and forest dwellers.” These sections ensure community rights related to habitat, habitation, and the right to live on forest lands, along with provisions for in situ rehabilitation.
The case involved the Saranda forest area in Jharkhand, a region known for its rich biodiversity and Sal forests, which forms a crucial wildlife corridor connecting with neighbouring states. The area is home to various species, including endangered ones like the Sal Forest Tortoise and the four-horned antelope.
Historically, a part of this forest was declared the “Saranda Game Sanctuary” in 1968. Following the state’s bifurcation, this area now falls under Jharkhand. Importantly, no mining activities had been conducted in the declared sanctuary area. The Supreme Court had previously urged the Jharkhand government to declare the Saranda region a reserve forest.
Referencing constitutional mandates and environmental law, the Court emphasised the state’s duty to recognise, conserve, and protect ecologically significant areas and wildlife. The Wildlife Institute of India’s report also supported the need for protection under the WPA.
The Court dismissed concerns that declaring the sanctuary would negatively impact tribal and forest dweller rights or necessitate demolishing public infrastructure. Instead, the judges suggested the state should educate these communities about their rights under the FRA and WPA.
The ruling clarified that the continuation of existing rights within the sanctuary is permissible and that provisions within the FRA allow for the diversion of forest land under specific circumstances. The Court noted inconsistencies in the state government’s stand regarding the area to be declared a sanctuary, highlighting how the proposed size had changed multiple times.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court directed the Jharkhand government to notify the previously declared sanctuary area as a wildlife sanctuary within three months. However, the Court allowed the exclusion of six specific compartments identified for mining zones. Crucially, the government was ordered to widely publicise that the rights of tribals and forest dwellers, both individual and community, would not be adversely affected by this declaration. The judgment also affirmed that certain activities, as sought by the applicant Steel Authority of India (SAIL), could still be permitted within the sanctuary area, in line with the FRA.
This judgment reinforces the legal framework designed to balance wildlife conservation with the rights and livelihoods of indigenous and forest-dependent communities.
