Arrested for a Reindeer Horn: Supreme Court Slams ‘Unlawful' Airport Arrest of NRI
The Supreme Court bench quashes FIR over the alleged deer horn arrest
In a strong rebuke to arbitrary detentions at airports, the Supreme Court has quashed the FIR and all related proceedings against Rocky Abhraham, an Indian-origin man settled in Italy, who was arrested at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport earlier this year for allegedly carrying a deer horn in violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
The Court termed his arrest and prosecution “unlawful” and warned authorities against “hasty and ill-advised” actions that damage India’s global image.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, while allowing the writ petition filed under Article 32, invoked its extraordinary powers under Articles 136 and 142 of the Constitution to grant relief, observing that the continued prosecution of the petitioner would amount to “gross abuse of the process of law".
Abhraham, who has lived and worked in Italy for 23 years, was apprehended on January 16, 2025, while transiting from the international to domestic terminal at Delhi Airport en route to Kochi. Authorities alleged that he possessed a deer horn and registered an FIR (No. 36 of 2025) under Sections 39, 49, and 51 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act. He was produced before a magistrate the next day, denied bail initially, and spent 14 days in Tihar Jail before being released on bail on January 22, subject to restrictions preventing him from leaving India.
A forensic report dated January 20, 2025, later confirmed that the seized item was a reindeer horn, which is not covered under the schedules of the Wildlife Act. Despite this finding, his passport remained impounded, and the case lingered before the Delhi High Court, prompting him to approach the apex court after the trial court imposed onerous travel conditions, including a Rs. 20 lakh fixed deposit as security.
Appearing for the government, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati candidly acknowledged that, in light of the forensic report, prosecution was “not warranted” and that the police would likely file a closure report. Taking note of this admission, the court said continuing proceedings against Abhraham would be a miscarriage of justice.
The Supreme Court also took a broader view of the issue, expressing concern over the lack of legal awareness among enforcement officers at airports.
“Jurisdictional agencies must sensitise their officers in prevailing laws before taking the drastic step of detention or arrest of an international traveller,” the bench said, adding that “such steps should not be taken in haste but only after obtaining proper legal advice".
Citing a recent case from Jaipur International Airport, where an octogenarian passenger was detained and his Rolex watch seized on the ground that it was a “luxury item”, the bench said such “ill-advised actions” not only violate human rights but also “bring the country into disrepute” internationally.
Declaring Abhraham’s arrest and FIR “unlawful,” court quashed all proceedings pending before the Delhi High Court and the trial court, and granted him liberty to seek damages before an appropriate forum for his wrongful detention.
However, the bench left open for adjudication in a pending suo motu case the larger issues concerning onerous bail and surety conditions that often cause prolonged incarceration of undertrial prisoners.
Case Title: Rocky Abhraham Vs Union of India And Ors
Judgment Date: October 13, 2025
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta