Muvattupuzha: A vigilance court in Muvattupuzha Saturday ordered a quick verification probe into a complaint that Malayalam superstar Mohanlal has ivory in possession at his Kochi residence.
The court, acting on a complaint by activist A.A. Paulose, asked the vigilance department to complete the probe and submit its report by November 28.
Former forest minister Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan will also face probe in the case.
The case goes a long way back. The case first surfaced in July 2011 following an income tax raid at the actor's house in Kochi when it came to light that he possessed elephant tusks. Income Tax officials seized the ivory in December that year.
Forest officials then registered a case against Mohanlal and two others in 2012, filing the first information report (FIR) before chief judicial magistrate at Perumbavoor, naming the actor as the first accused.
However, the forest ministry led by Thiruvanchoor under the then UDF government let the actor keep the ivory at his home, stating that there was permission from wild life authorities. The tusks were returned to the actor.
The latest complaint by Paulose alleges that according to the Wildlife Act, the actor cannot keep the ivory with him and that Mohanlal was allowed to keep the ivory through corrupt measures.
Besides Mohanlal, the roles of Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan and three other persons will also be probed, the court said Saturday.
P.N. Krishnakumar and N. Krishnakumar, second and third accused respectively in the case, had stated they obtained permission from wild life authorities for the possession of ivory which was later handed over to Mohanlal for safe custody as they were employed abroad.
The case was then registered under section 44(6) of the Indian Wildlife Act, which deals with possession of trophies.
Mohanlal maintained that he had purchased the tusks and then chief minister Oommen Chandy of the United Democratic Front (UDF) government asked forest minister Thiruvanchoor Radhakrishnan to look into the matter.
According to rules, possession of elephant tusks by anyone is against the Forest and Wildlife Act.
The petitioner said the forest officials had erred in their duty and did not act according to the law.
Last year, a petition seeking CBI probe into the case was dismissed by the Kerala High Court.
(With agency inputs)
