The Supreme Court is facing scrutiny for allegedly failing to adhere to its own precedents, particularly concerning the prolonged duration of stay orders in criminal matters. A specific case involving a CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) probe into animal poaching within the Corbett Tiger Reserve (CTR) has been stalled for seven years due to a stay order issued by the apex court.

The case originated in the Uttarakhand High Court, which, on September 4, 2018, directed the CBI to investigate all poaching incidents in the state over the preceding five years. The High Court's order sought to uncover any complicity or collusion of forest department officials in these incidents, prompted by reports of the deaths of 40 tigers and 272 leopards in the state within two and a half years.

However, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court's order on October 22, 2018, through an ex-parte ruling following an appeal by D. S. Khati, a retired principal chief conservator of forest (wildlife) and chief wildlife warden of the state. This stay has effectively halted the CBI's investigation for an extended period.

Recently, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea filed by an environmentalist from Uttarakhand, seeking the lifting of the stay order to allow the CBI to conclude its investigation. The CBI's preliminary inquiry had suggested a "connivance of forest officers/officials with poachers". Furthermore, the CBI itself has submitted an application for the vacation of the stay order, emphasizing the findings of its preliminary inquiry.

Advocate Govind Jee, representing the environmentalist Atul Sati, brought the case before a bench headed by CJI B. R. Gavai, pleading for an expedited hearing, which the Supreme Court granted, scheduling it for November 17, 2025. The petitioner contends that the High Court's order was based on scientific reports from the Wildlife Institute of India and the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau. The prolonged stay, according to the petitioner, has obstructed the detection and dismantling of transnational and trans-state networks involved in tiger poaching.

Records indicate that the CBI also filed an application in 2023 to vacate the stay order. This inaction contradicts the Supreme Court's repeated declarations that stay orders in criminal matters should not be unduly prolonged. This principle is rooted in the understanding that justice delayed is justice denied, and that extended stays can impede investigations and allow criminal activities to continue unchecked.

The Supreme Court's handling of this case has drawn criticism, raising questions about the court's consistency in applying its own rulings. The delay has not only stalled a crucial investigation into wildlife poaching but also potentially undermined efforts to protect endangered species and combat environmental crime. The upcoming hearing on November 17 will be critical in determining whether the Supreme Court will lift the stay and allow the CBI to complete its investigation, or if the case will remain in limbo, further eroding public trust in the judicial system.