Peacock death sparks cover-up charges against Haveri forest officials

Haveri: A major controversy has erupted in Haveri district following allegations of a coordinated cover-up, gross administrative negligence and statutory violations of wildlife protection norms by senior forest officials over the death of an Indian peacock.The issue has escalated into a legal battle after a formal complaint was filed with the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau in New Delhi, the principal chief conservator of forests (wildlife) and the chief wildlife warden.The complaint by Ranebennur-based environmentalist Dr Basavaraj Maidur relates to the discovery of an Indian peacock carcass at Masanagi village on June 25, 2026.The Indian peacock, also known as a peafowl, is the country’s national bird and is strictly protected under Schedule-I, Part III of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.According to Dr Maidur’s complaint, divisional forest officer (DFO) Akshay Prakashakar, assistant conservator of forests (ACF) Manjunath K H, and Byadagi range forest officer (RFO) Lokesh Chauhan had bypassed established legal and forensic protocols in dealing with the death.Under Section 39 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, all wild animal carcasses are govt property. For a high-priority Schedule-I species, authorities are legally mandated to immediately register a wildlife offence report (WOR) to investigate potential foul play, such as poisoning, poaching or electrocution.

To date, no such report has been filed.Furthermore, the officials allegedly violated the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) guidelines by failing to ensure the presence of a gazetted officer when the carcass was being disposed of to prevent any illegal harvesting of the feathers or body parts. Instead, the task was delegated to lower-rung ground staff.Activists also allege that no formal panchnama (spot inquiry memo) was prepared with independent public witnesses, violating Section 50 of BNSS.Adding to the outrage are conflicting reports surrounding the disposal.While photographic evidence submitted to WCCB suggests the carcass was burned in the forest, RFO Lokesh Chauhan claimed to the media it was intentionally left behind as “food for other wild animals”.By approaching WCCB and the chief wildlife warden, Dr Maidur has demanded an immediate, high-level inquiry. Conservationists argue that under Section 51 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, unauthorised disposal and destruction of evidence involving a protected species carry severe penalties, including imprisonment.When TOI tried to contact DFO Prakashakar, he was not available.Quote“We have received a complaint about protocol violations regarding the peacock’s death and cremation. We will ask for clarification from DFO, Haveri, soon. - Kumar Pushkar | PCCF (wildlife) and chief wildlife warden, Karnataka