Elvish Yadav snake venom case: What Noida Police’s chargesheet said

The Noida Police on Saturday filed a 1,200-page chargesheet against Big Boss OTT winner Elvish Yadav and seven others in connection with the snake venom case. This comes nearly five months after the police filed an FIR against six people including the Youtuber following allegations of them providing snake venom at a party in Noida.
According to reports, the 1200-page chargesheet filed by the Noida Police reveals how the snakes were smuggled and how their venom was used at the parties. It said that Yadav was in contact with the snake handlers who were first arrested by the police. The chargesheet also mentioned that a poisonous snake and 20 milliliters of venom from the Krait species were recovered from the party location, reported ANI citing the police.
Reportedly, the police have also included expert comments from the department of medicine toxicology lab in Jaipur – where the venom was tested – in the chargesheet.
In November last year, the Noida police filed an FIR following a complaint by an NGO run by Maneka Gandhi ‘People For Animals’ against Elvish Yadav and five others for allegedly providing snake venom at a rave party in Noida. According to the complaint, the NGO conducted a “sting operation” wherein they contacted Yadav and asked him to organise a rave party and get Cobra venom.
Following this, the police booked six people, including Yadav, under the Wildlife (Protection) Act and Section 120A (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code. Days later, five of the accused – Rahul, Titunath, Jayakaran, Narayan, and Ravinath – were arrested after the police recovered snakes from their possession.
While Yadav refuted the charges against him calling them “baseless and fake”, he was arrested on March 17 and was sent to 14 days of judicial custody. However, he was granted bail by the Gautam Buddha Nagar district court five days later. The police also dropped charges of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act against him, stating that it was a “mistake” on their side.
(With inputs from ANI)