<p>The <a href="https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-crime-news/article/bombay-high-court-rejects-bail-plea-of-accused-in-baba-siddique-murder-case-23627329" target="_blank" rel="none noopener">Bombay High Court</a> has ordered the Maharashtra government to compensate a farmer for pomegranate trees damaged by parrots, ruling that the birds qualify as "wild animals" under the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, reported PTI.</p>
<p>The court held that the state is liable to reimburse citizens for losses caused by wildlife, as such animals are considered government property under the law.</p>
<h2>Nagpur bench highlights need to protect both farmers and wildlife</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/bombay-hc-seeks-security-audit-details-from-police-for-judges-residences-and-court-buildings-23616484" target="_blank" rel="none noopener">Nagpur bench</a> of Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta observed that failure to compensate farmers could push them towards harming protected species, defeating the purpose of wildlife conservation laws, reported PTI.</p>
<p>A copy of the order, passed on April 24, was made available on Sunday.</p>
<h2>Farmer&rsquo;s petition over pomegranate crop damage</h2>
<p>The ruling came on a petition filed by Mahadeo Dekate (70), a farmer from Hingi village in Wardha district. He claimed that wild parrots from a nearby sanctuary damaged his pomegranate orchard in May 2016 and sought compensation, reported PTI.</p>
<p>The court directed the state government to pay Rs 200 per tree for 200 damaged trees.</p>
<h2>State&rsquo;s stand on compensation rejected</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/bombay-high-court-rules-housing-societies-cannot-act-as-arbitrators-in-ownership-disputes-23626674" target="_blank" rel="none noopener">state government</a> opposed the plea, arguing that existing government resolutions allowed compensation only for damage caused by animals such as elephants and bison, reported PTI.</p>
<p>However, the court rejected this argument, stating that compensation policies cannot arbitrarily exclude other wild species.</p>
<h2>Equality principle must be upheld</h2>
<p>The bench emphasised that limiting compensation to select species lacks rationale and violates Article 14 of the Constitution.</p>
<p>&ldquo;A person entitled to compensation under statutory provisions cannot be deprived merely because some species are not included in <a href="https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/bombay-hc-calls-handcuffing-of-duo-by-police-humiliation-orders-maharashtra-govt-to-pay-compensation-23627172" target="_blank" rel="none noopener">government</a> resolutions,&rdquo; the court said, reported PTI.</p>
<h2>Wildlife Act overrides government resolutions</h2>
<p>The court clarified that the Wildlife Act, being a legislative statute, overrides government resolutions.</p>
<p>It reiterated that all wild animals, including parrots, are state property, and citizens should not be made to bear losses caused by them.</p>
<h2>Court warns of unintended consequences</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/bombay-hc-seeks-maharashtra-reply-on-plea-against-muslim-quota-removal-23623807" target="_blank" rel="none noopener">The HC</a> noted that denying compensation could lead farmers to adopt harmful measures to protect crops, thereby endangering wildlife and undermining conservation efforts, reported PTI.</p>
<h2>Inspection confirmed extent of damage</h2>
<p>According to the plea, forest and agriculture officials had inspected Dekate&rsquo;s orchard and found that nearly 50 per cent of the fruits were damaged by birds, reported PTI.</p>
<p>However, officials initially refused compensation, citing the absence of provisions covering bird-related damage.</p>
<h2>Parrots explicitly covered under law</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/2006-malegaon-blast-case-bombay-hc-discharges-four-accused-quashes-all-charges-against-them-23626955" target="_blank" rel="none noopener">The petitioner</a> relied on provisions of the Wildlife Act, which define wild animals as those found in nature and include species such as Alexandrine parakeets, reported PTI.</p>
<p>The court accepted this argument, noting that parrots are listed in the Act&rsquo;s schedule of protected species.</p>
<h2>Farmer claimed significant financial loss</h2>
<p>Dekate stated that he suffered losses amounting to nearly Rs 20 lakh due to the damage caused by parrots.</p>
<p><strong>(With inputs from PTI)</strong></p>

The Bombay High Court has ordered the Maharashtra government to compensate a farmer for pomegranate trees damaged by parrots, ruling that the birds qualify

Bombay HC rules parrots are ‘wild animals’, orders Maharashtra to compensate farmer

MMRDA completes key 42m steel span over Western Railway tracks for Mumbai Metro line 6

The court held that the state is liable to reimburse citizens for losses caused by wildlife, as such animals are considered government property under the law

Parrots are 'wild animals', rules Bombay HC; orders Maharashtra govt to compensate farmer for crop damage

Trending Stories

Latest Photos

Latest Videos

Latest Web Stories

Ganeshotsav 2026

Home / Mumbai / Mumbai News / Article / Parrots are 'wild animals', rules Bombay HC; orders Maharashtra govt to compensate farmer for crop damage