NEW DELHI: The Allahabad High Court on Monday dismissed YouTuber Elvish Yadav 's plea against a chargesheet that accused him of misusing snakes and snake venom in YouTube videos, organizing rave parties, and involving foreigners who allegedly made people consume snake venom and other drugs.
Justice Saurabh Srivastava dismissed the plea while noting that the allegations in the chargesheet and FIR would be examined during trial. The court also pointed out that Yadav had not challenged the FIR in his plea.
Senior advocate Naveen Sinha, representing Yadav with advocate Nipun Singh, argued that the person who filed the FIR was not competent to do so under the Wildlife Act. They also maintained that Yadav was neither present at the party nor were any items recovered from him.
Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal countered that investigation revealed Yadav had supplied snakes to individuals from whom seizures were made.
The court, unmoved by Yadav's counsel's arguments, left the matter to the trial court for investigation of the allegations.
Yadav faces charges under multiple sections of the Wildlife Protection Act , Indian Penal Code, and NDPS Act in the FIR registered at Police Station Sector-49, Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar .
The First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar, has issued a summons order in the case.
Yadav challenged the chargesheet and proceedings, claiming the informant was no longer an animal welfare officer but filed the FIR by posing as one.
"It is a well-known fact that the applicant is an influential person and appears on several reality shows on television, and inevitably the involvement of the applicant in the instant FIR attracted great attention of the media. Consequently, influenced by the aforesaid attention, the police officers attempted to make the case more sensitive by invoking Sections 27 and 27A the NDPS Act immediately after arresting the applicant. However, the police officers failed to prove the additional charges, and as such, they were dropped."
Yadav's plea argued that no snake, narcotic, or psychotropic substance was recovered from him, and no causal connection was established between him and the other co-accused.
The specific sections under which Yadav has been chargesheeted include Sections 9, 39, 48A, 49, 50, and 51 of Wildlife Protection Act, Sections 284, 289, and 120B of IPC, and Sections 8, 22, 29, 30, and 32 of NDPS Act.
Justice Saurabh Srivastava dismissed the plea while noting that the allegations in the chargesheet and FIR would be examined during trial. The court also pointed out that Yadav had not challenged the FIR in his plea.
Senior advocate Naveen Sinha, representing Yadav with advocate Nipun Singh, argued that the person who filed the FIR was not competent to do so under the Wildlife Act. They also maintained that Yadav was neither present at the party nor were any items recovered from him.
Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal countered that investigation revealed Yadav had supplied snakes to individuals from whom seizures were made.
The court, unmoved by Yadav's counsel's arguments, left the matter to the trial court for investigation of the allegations.
Yadav faces charges under multiple sections of the Wildlife Protection Act , Indian Penal Code, and NDPS Act in the FIR registered at Police Station Sector-49, Noida, District Gautam Buddh Nagar .
The First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar, has issued a summons order in the case.
Yadav challenged the chargesheet and proceedings, claiming the informant was no longer an animal welfare officer but filed the FIR by posing as one.
"It is a well-known fact that the applicant is an influential person and appears on several reality shows on television, and inevitably the involvement of the applicant in the instant FIR attracted great attention of the media. Consequently, influenced by the aforesaid attention, the police officers attempted to make the case more sensitive by invoking Sections 27 and 27A the NDPS Act immediately after arresting the applicant. However, the police officers failed to prove the additional charges, and as such, they were dropped."
Yadav's plea argued that no snake, narcotic, or psychotropic substance was recovered from him, and no causal connection was established between him and the other co-accused.
The specific sections under which Yadav has been chargesheeted include Sections 9, 39, 48A, 49, 50, and 51 of Wildlife Protection Act, Sections 284, 289, and 120B of IPC, and Sections 8, 22, 29, 30, and 32 of NDPS Act.
You may also like
Ideal Fridge Temperature for Summer: Keep Your Food Fresh and Electricity Bill Low
Daily Horoscope - May 13, 2025 (For All Zodiac Signs Today)
"India is mature democracy that is fighting terrorism and not attacking civilian lives": Shaina NC hails PM's address
Aadhaar Card update: Now Apply for Aadhaar Card from Home – Here's the Simplest Step-by-Step Process!
British couple killed after high-powered Ferrari crashes off mountain highway into river
