The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted interim relief to YouTuber Elvish Yadav by staying all trial court proceedings against him in the high-profile snake venom case. A bench led by JusticeMMSundresh, accompanied by Justice Joymalya Bagchi, also issued notices to the Uttar Pradesh government and complainant Gaurav Gupta, directing them to respond to Yadav’s plea.
Yadav had approached the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court, on May12,2025, dismissed his petition seeking to quash both the FIR and chargesheet against him.
The High Court had held that the allegations—including misuse of snakes and snake venom in YouTube videos and organising rave parties where intoxicating substances were provided—needed detailed examination during trial, and noted he had not challenged the FIR itself.
In his petition, filed through Advocates Shahrukh Ali, Raman Yadav, and Aman Jha, Yadav challenged the FIR’s legal validity. He argued the complaint was lodged by an individual no longer holding the position of Animal Welfare Officer, and thus lacked competence under the Wildlife Protection Act.
Further, the petition states that “no recovery—whether of snakes, venom, or narcotics—has been made from or in connection with him,” and that he was not even present at the venue when the alleged offences occurred.
Yadav’s counsel contended that the charges under the NDPS Act were added without proper compliance, and that the case appeared to be sensationalised due to his public profile.
The prosecution, however, insisted that Yadav had supplied snakes to individuals from whom recovery was made, and that a prima-facie case had been established.
THE CASE AGAINST ELVISH YADAV
The case dates back to a complaint lodged in November 2023 by members of the NGO People For Animals, who accused Elvish Yadav of organising rave parties where snake venom was used as a recreational intoxicant. In a subsequent police raid at a banquet hall in Noida, nine snakes (including cobras and kraits) and around 20ml of snake venom were seized.
Yadav was arrested on March 17, 2024, based on the FIR filed under several sections of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, sections 284 and 289 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section120A (criminal conspiracy), and multiple provisions of the NDPS Act.
He was remanded for 14 days but released on bail shortly after. The chargesheet filed in April 2024 spanned over 1,200 pages and included allegations of exotic snake smuggling, the involvement of foreign nationals in consuming venom, and links to rave events.
With the Supreme Court’s stay in place, all proceedings before the trial court are paused for now. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on August 29, when responses are sought from the state and the complainant.
In a major legal development on August 6, 2025, the Supreme Court of India granted interim relief to YouTuber and Bigg Boss OTT 2 winner Elvish Yadav, staying all trial court proceedings in the sensational snake venom and rave parties case Reddit+15India Today+15ABP Live+15.
Background of the Case
In November 2023, activists associated with People for Animals filed an FIR alleging that Elvish Yadav organised rave parties in Noida where snake venom was used as a recreational intoxicant by partygoers, including some foreign nationals www.ndtv.com+5India Today+5mint+5.
A police raid at a banquet hall in Noida uncovered nine snakes (including cobras and kraits) and approximately 20 ml of snake venom, prompting criminal charges under:
Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972;
Sections 284, 289, 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC);
Multiple sections of the NDPS Act India Today+1The Law Advice+7latestlaws.com+7India Today+7.
Yadav was arrested on March 17, 2024, and remanded for 14 days before being released on bail. A 1,200‑page chargesheet was filed in April 2024 The Law Advice+13India Today+13dnpindia.in+13.
High Court Proceedings
Yadav sought to quash the chargesheet and summoning order, challenging the competence of the complainant (who allegedly identified himself as an Animal Welfare Officer but was no longer in that role) and pointing out that no snakes, venom, or narcotics were recovered from him, nor was he even present at the alleged venue during the rave event The Indian Express+11millenniumpost.in+11latestlaws.com+11.
The Allahabad High Court, in a May 12, 2025 judgment, refused to quash his petition. Justice Saurabh Srivastava observed that the FIR and chargesheet contained witness statements and allegations requiring fact‑based examination at trial. The court also emphasized that Elvish Yadav had not challenged the FIR itself, which weakened his stance Reddit+13millenniumpost.in+13India Today+13.
Importantly, the High Court clarified that fame or public status does not grant immunity and that all individuals are equal before the law The Law Advice.
Supreme Court Intervention
On August 6, 2025, a bench of Justices M. M. Sundresh and Joymalya Bagchi entered the fray. While hearing Yadav’s appeal, the Court granted an interim stay on trial court proceedings. It also issued notices to the Uttar Pradesh government and complainant Gaurav Gupta to respond to Yadav’s appeal Bhaskar English+7India Today+7mint+7.
The Court consolidated this petition with one filed by the activists seeking police protection, and posted the next hearing for August 29, 2025. Until then, no further action can proceed in the lower court dnpindia.in.
Key Legal Contentions
Defence Arguments:
The FIR was reportedly lodged by someone not authorised under the Wildlife Act.
No incriminating material was found in Yadav’s possession.
He was not linked to the alleged venue or co‑accused during the offence The Law Advice.
Prosecution Position:
Investigations alleged Yadav supplied snakes to those from whom venom was seized.
A prima‑facie case was considered to exist under wildlife and narcotics laws The Times of India+4India Today+4millenniumpost.in+4latestlaws.com+1.
Why This Stay Matters
The stay halts framing of charges at the trial court level, giving Yadav breathing space to challenge the very basis of the case.
His legal team now has time to argue procedural errors—such as FIR standing, charge framing, and statutory jurisdiction under Wildlife or NDPS statutes.
At the same time, the authorities must justify their stance before the Supreme Court, providing date‑specific responses to the allegations.
What Happens Next?
August 29, 2025 is the next fixed date for hearings. On that date, both sides will have to address procedural and substantive issues.
Pending the apex court’s order, the trial court remains frozen—no further hearings or evidentiary steps can proceed.
Bottom‑line: The SC’s decision offers a temporary reprieve to Elvish Yadav, pausing the trial until higher courts assess whether the foundational legal groundwork—particularly regarding jurisdiction and FIR validity—is sound. But the battle is far from over. The final adjudication will hinge on whether his objections gain traction in the Supreme Court and whether the evidence can be tested at trial.
– Ends
Published On:
Aug 6, 2025