Elvish Yadav, a popular YouTuber, has received harsh criticism from the Supreme Court of India over a snake and poison case. The court was hearing his challenge against a charge sheet and criminal proceedings initiated against him, which led to an accusation that his actions conveyed a harmful message to society regarding the treatment of wildlife. The bench, comprising Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh, emphasized that allowing a prominent figure like Yadav to misuse helpless and voiceless animals could send the wrong message to the public and highlighted the need to review provisions of the Wildlife Protection Act concerning the case.

The Supreme Court sternly addressed Yadav's defense, where his lawyer Mukta Gupta claimed that the snakes were not his and that he merely made a guest appearance in a music video where snakes were handled by someone else. The court did not find this argument satisfactory, asserting that irrespective of who handled the snakes, it was important for Yadav to take responsibility for the consequences of using protected species in his content. The justices underscored that snakes are protected species under the law, and any negative impact on them must be taken seriously, suggesting that the case would undergo further investigation under the relevant wildlife protection statutes.

This incident has stirred discussions on the responsibilities of influential figures in media and the implications of their actions on wildlife protection and societal norms. Public attention is now focused not only on Yadav's case but also on broader issues of wildlife conservation and the portrayal of animals in popular culture, warranting a careful examination of how such actions influence public sentiment and behavior towards wildlife in India.