YouTuber Elvish Yadav’s Plea Dismissed in Wildlife, NDPS Act Case

Prayagraj (The Uttam Hindu): The Allahabad High Court has dismissed the petition filed by YouTuber Elvish Yadav challenging the chargesheet filed against him in a case involving the alleged misuse of snakes and snake venom during rave parties, which were reportedly recorded for YouTube videos.

A single bench of Justice Saurabh Srivastava rejected the plea on Monday observing that the allegations raised in the FIR and chargesheet will be tested during the trial. The judge noted that Yadav had not challenged the FIR itself in his petition.

The charges against Yadav stem from an FIR lodged at Sector-49 Police Station in Noida, Gautam Buddh Nagar. He has been chargesheeted under various sections of the Wildlife Protection Act, IPC and the NDPS Act. The court was informed that a summons has already been issued by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in Gautam Buddh Nagar.

Senior advocate Naveen Sinha, appearing for Yadav, argued that the FIR was filed by an informant who was not legally authorized under the Wildlife Protection Act claiming that the individual falsely presented himself as an animal welfare officer. It was also argued that no narcotics, psychotropic substances or snakes were recovered from Yadav and that he was not present at the alleged party.

However, Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal contended that the investigation revealed Yadav had supplied snakes to individuals from whom seizures were made during the raid.

The court remained unconvinced by the arguments of Yadav’s counsel and left the matter for trial. It observed that the veracity of the statements and allegations would be examined during judicial proceedings.

The charges against Yadav include Sections 9, 39, 48A, 49, 50, and 51 of the Wildlife Protection Act; Sections 284, 289, and 120B of the IPC; and Sections 8, 22, 29, 30 and 32 of the NDPS Act.

Yadav’s team also claimed that due to his popularity and frequent TV appearances, the case received disproportionate media attention, which led to allegedly exaggerated charges by the police. Notably, Sections 27 and 27A of the NDPS Act, initially invoked against him, were later dropped for lack of evidence.

The court’s dismissal clears the way for the case to proceed to trial.