Supreme Court Refers Tribal Privacy PIL on Forest Surveillance to Ministry of Environment
The apex court on 20 March 2026 declined to entertain a PIL that alleged invasive use of camera traps and drones in forest and tiger reserves, capturing identifiable images of tribal communities without consent. The bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M. Panchol, directed the petitioner to submit a representation to the competent authorities, notably the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.
Key Developments
- The Court recognised the utility of surveillance for wildlife protection but emphasized the need for privacy safeguards.
- Petitioner, a Cambridge professor, sought a high‑powered committee to frame guidelines on data handling.
- Senior Advocates Salman Khurshid and Prashant Kumar Sen argued that surveillance infringes rights under Article 21.
- The Court ordered the petitioner to approach the Ministry with proposed guidelines, rather than issuing a judicial directive.
Important Facts
The petition focused on Jim Corbett National Park, but cited similar surveillance in Kaziranga, Hemis and Ranthambore. It highlighted the absence of a uniform legal framework governing the