Jharkhand HC slams delay in illegal tree felling probe, 4 years on
Synopsis
Four years after hundreds of trees were allegedly felled and hauled away in 200-plus trucks during the Covid-19 lockdown, Jharkhand's High Court is still waiting for a completed probe — and has now asked the state to explain whether a 'larger conspiracy' shielded those responsible.
Key Takeaways
The Jharkhand High Court expressed displeasure over the four-year delay in the CID probe into illegal tree felling during the Covid-19 lockdown in 2020 .
A bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad questioned why the investigation remains incomplete and sought a detailed government response.
The court flagged that the CID inquiry appears confined to Panki, Palamu , while the petition alleges felling across Jamtara, Palamu, West Singhbhum , and Ranchi .
Petitioner's counsel alleged attempts to shield the accused; the court sought a reply on a possible 'larger conspiracy' .
The state has admitted Forest Department officials were implicated; chargesheets filed against two , arrest warrant issued against a third.
The next hearing is scheduled after two weeks .
The Jharkhand High Court on Tuesday expressed sharp displeasure over the state government's failure to complete the investigation into alleged large-scale illegal felling of trees across multiple districts during the Covid-19 lockdown in 2020 — a probe now in its fourth year. The case involves hundreds of trees allegedly cut and transported out of the state using more than 200 trucks.
What the Court Asked
A division bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad questioned the state government on why the investigation had not been concluded even after four years, and sought a clear account of the status of the inquiry handed over to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). The bench also flagged that the CID's probe appears to be limited to the Panki area of Palamu district, while the original petition alleges that illegal felling occurred across several districts. The court directed the government to file a detailed response on this discrepancy.
Petitioner Alleges Shielding of Accused
Counsel for the petitioner, Abhay Kumar Mishra, submitted that the inquiry had progressed at a very slow pace since being transferred to the CID, and alleged that there were deliberate attempts to protect those involved. Taking serious note of this claim, the court sought a detailed reply from the state government on the possibility of a 'larger conspiracy' behind the delay.
What the State Has Admitted So Far
In earlier hearings, the state government had acknowledged that the role of officials and staff of the Forest Department had emerged during the investigation. It also admitted that chargesheets had been filed against two forest officials, and that an arrest warrant had been issued against another accused. The CID is currently probing two FIRs registered in Palamu district in connection with the case.
Scale of Alleged Felling
According to the petition, hundreds of trees were allegedly felled illegally during the lockdown period across districts including Jamtara, Palamu, West Singhbhum (Chaibasa), and Ranchi. The felled timber was reportedly transported out using more than 200 trucks, with FIRs registered at multiple police stations in the aftermath.
What Happens Next
The court had previously observed that keeping a probe pending for such an extended period was a serious matter, and that delays could not be justified merely by citing the need for documents. The next hearing in the matter is scheduled after two weeks, by which time the state government is expected to file its detailed response. The case tests whether accountability in environmental crimes can survive institutional inertia.
Point of View
Not just investigative delay. The Jharkhand High Court's invocation of a 'larger conspiracy' angle is significant: it signals judicial scepticism about whether the CID's narrow focus on Palamu is by design rather than resource constraint. With Forest Department officials already implicated, the case raises uncomfortable questions about state complicity during a period when lockdown restrictions made oversight nearly impossible. The real test is whether the court's escalating pressure translates into a time-bound investigation framework — or whether the next two-week adjournment simply becomes another entry in a long list of deferred accountability.
NationPress
30 Jun 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Jharkhand illegal tree felling case about?
The case involves the alleged large-scale illegal felling of hundreds of trees across multiple districts of Jharkhand — including Jamtara, Palamu, West Singhbhum, and Ranchi — during the Covid-19 lockdown in 2020. The felled timber was reportedly transported out of the state using more than 200 trucks, and FIRs were registered at several police stations.
Why is the Jharkhand High Court concerned about the probe?
The court is concerned because the CID investigation has not been completed even after four years. It has also flagged that the probe appears limited to Palamu's Panki area, despite the petition alleging felling across multiple districts, and has sought a reply on a possible 'larger conspiracy' to shield the accused.
Have any arrests or chargesheets been filed in the case?
Yes. The state government has acknowledged that chargesheets were filed against two Forest Department officials, and an arrest warrant was issued against another accused. The CID is currently investigating two FIRs registered in Palamu district.
What did the petitioner's counsel allege in court?
Counsel Abhay Kumar Mishra alleged that the probe had progressed at a very slow pace since being handed to the CID and that there were deliberate attempts to protect those involved in the illegal felling.
When is the next hearing in the Jharkhand tree felling case?
The next hearing is scheduled after two weeks, by which time the state government is required to file a detailed response on the scope of the investigation and the 'larger conspiracy' angle raised by the court.
