Discuss the institutional framework for fighting wildlife crime in India. How can Centre–State coordination be improved?

In October 2026, Kuno cheetah KNG22 died of five firearm pellet injuries in Morena's territorial forest. MoEFCC then deputed an NTCA–WCCB team to work with a State Forest–Police STF [1]. The case shows that India has several layers of wildlife-crime institutions, but they are weakest where Centre and State meet.

Institutional Framework

• Legal base: the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 defines offences and protected areas. Its 2006 amendment created specialised central bodies [2].
• WCCB: a statutory bureau under MoEFCC, set up in 2007, with forest, police and customs officers. It collects intelligence on organised wildlife crime, shares it with States, and carries out India's obligations under international conventions [3].
• NTCA: a statutory authority under Section 38L [4]. It leads Project Cheetah under a Cheetah Steering Committee of 11 experts, set up in 2023 [5].
• State machinery: Forest departments and State police handle routine enforcement. WCCB is meant to support them, not replace them [3].
• Ad hoc and community layer: STFs are formed for specific cases [1]. There are also 450+ Cheetah Mitras in 80 villages [5].

Coordination Gaps

• Protection is concentrated inside parks. Animals range into territorial forests where staff are few, which is where KNG22 was shot [1].
• The Centre acts after the event. The Central team was sent only after the death [1].
• Expert bodies lack enforcement expertise. The Steering Committee has no crime-intelligence member [5].
• Landscapes cross State borders. Collared cheetahs have moved towards Rajasthan [5].

Improving Centre–State Coordination

• Standing joint protocols: make WCCB a permanent participant in NTCA reviews, and share collar data in real time with State STFs and district police.
• Inter-State landscape plans: an MP–Rajasthan plan with shared rapid-response and crime protocols.
• Capacity building: use WCCB's mandate to train State forest and police staff in investigation [3].
• Community deterrence: extend Cheetah Mitras and swift livestock compensation to territorial divisions, so villagers have less reason to kill in revenge [5].
• Joint accountability: after a probe, MoEFCC should issue directions with deadlines that State officials must meet [1].

The framework is sound on paper: it has a strong law, a statutory intelligence bureau and community volunteers. What it lacks is joint working across the landscape. Shared protocols, shared data and common accountability between Centre and States would help meet the Article 48A duty to protect wildlife and India's SDG 15 commitments, and keep reintroduced species safe outside parks as well as inside them.