Bandhavgarh Tiger Deaths: Madhya Pradesh HC Directs Field Director To File Action Taken Report

The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has sought a detailed status report regarding reported unnatural deaths of tigers in the Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve, directing the Field Director to place on record the action taken in cases where human intervention is suspected.

The order was passed on February 11, 2026 in Writ Petition No. 12 of 2026 titled Ajay Dubey vs Union of India and Others.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf was hearing submissions made by Senior Advocate Aditya Sanghi, appearing with Advocate Alka Singh for the petitioner. Sanghi informed the court that even after the last date of January 20, 2026, additional tiger deaths had been reported in the reserve, allegedly by unnatural means or causes other than territorial fights between the animals.

Taking note of the submission, the bench recorded that in the connected proceedings, including W.P. No. 1411 of 2014, concerns had been raised about the circumstances surrounding tiger mortality in the protected area. The court observed that a chart had been filed by the petitioner detailing the reasons cited for various tiger deaths. It noted that in certain instances, the deaths were attributed to “unnatural reasons i.e. intervention of humans.”

In view of the seriousness of the issue, the bench directed the Field Director of Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve to file a comprehensive status report. The report must specify the deaths that have been reported, clarify the circumstances in which they occurred, and include an action taken report wherever unnatural deaths have been identified.

Importantly, the court went a step further and directed that the status report must also indicate the steps taken to prosecute persons found responsible in cases involving human intervention. The bench required that the authorities detail what action has been initiated against those identified as culpable, underscoring the need for accountability.

The matter has now been listed for further consideration on February 25, 2026.

Representing the Union of India, Additional Solicitor General Sunil Jain appeared along with Deputy Solicitor General S.M. Guru. The State was represented by Deputy Advocate General Vivek Sharma. Advocate Anuja Sharma appeared for respondent No. 6 in W.P. No. 1411 of 2014, while Advocate M.P. Tripathi represented respondent No. 7 in the connected petition.

The court’s intervention comes amid continued public and environmental concerns over tiger conservation and the protection of wildlife habitats in India’s notified reserves. Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve, one of the country’s prominent tiger habitats, has often been at the centre of debates relating to poaching, habitat pressure and human interference.

By seeking a structured report on reported tiger deaths and mandating disclosure of prosecutorial steps, the High court has signalled that instances of alleged human involvement will be subject to judicial scrutiny.

Case Title: Ajay Dubey v. Union of India and Others

Date of Order: February 11, 2026

Bench: Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf