Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court today (August 6) granted a stay on trial court proceedings against YouTuber Elvish Yadav in a case alleging that he misused snakes and snake venom for a YouTube video and was involved in organising rave parties where foreigners allegedly supplied snake venom and other intoxicating drugs.

A bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued notice in a plea against Allahabad High Court's order dated May 12, 2025, which had dismissed Yadav's petition challenging the chargesheet and summoning order issued in a case under various provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act, IPC, and NDPS Act.

The Court tagged the matter with another case by a complainant seeking protection which is kept for hearing on August 29. Senior Advocate Mukta Gupta for Yadav requested an interim stay in the meantime after contending that NDPS case is not made out against Yadav and there is non-compliance with statutory provisions.

The case was listed before the trial court for framing of charges on Friday.

Background

The case stems from an FIR lodged at PS Sector-49, Noida. The chargesheet against Yadav invokes Sections 9, 39, 48A, 49, 50 and 51 of the Wildlife Protection Act as well as Sections 284, 289 and 120B of the IPC and Sections 8, 22, 29, 30 and 32 of the NDPS Act. The First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar, has taken cognisance of the charges and issued a summoning order.

Before the High Court, Senior Advocate Navin Sinha argued that the FIR itself was not legally valid as the informant was not competent to file it under the Wildlife Protection Act. He submitted that the informant had previously served as an Animal Welfare Officer but was no longer holding that post when the FIR was registered. It was also contended that no snakes, narcotic substances, or psychotropic drugs were recovered from Yadav, and that he was not even present at the party where the alleged offences occurred.

Yadav's counsel further submitted that the police had acted under media pressure due to his public profile as an influencer and reality show participant. They claimed that after his arrest, the police added Sections 27 and 27A of the NDPS Act in an attempt to sensationalise the case, but later dropped these charges as they could not be substantiated.

It was also argued that Yadav had been approached in June 2023 to shoot a song involving snakes, and that the snakes featured in the video were non-poisonous pets belonging to the song's producers. Since no harm was caused to any person or animal during the shoot, the applicability of the Wildlife Protection Act and NDPS Act was disputed.

In response, Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal for the State submitted that the investigation had revealed Yadav supplied the snakes to individuals from whom the animals were recovered. He argued that the defence raised by Yadav could only be examined during trial, and that a prima facie case had been made out against him.

The High Court was not convinced by the submissions made on Yadav's behalf and declined to quash the proceedings. The Court held that the allegations, including those disputed by the defence, are matters for the trial court to decide.

The High Court rejected Yadav's plea noting that the allegations made in the FIR and chargesheet would be examined during trial. The Court observed that Yadav had not challenged the FIR itself and held that his popularity or public status could not be a ground for extending protection.

Senior Advocate Mukta Gupta along with Advocates Raman Yadav and Aman Jha (AoR) represented Elvish Yadav.

Case no. – SLP(Crl) No. 11480/2025

Case Title – ELVISH YADAV @ SIDDHARTH Versus STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.