According to reports, the actor submitted details of the items as part of the state's declaration process related to wildlife possessions. The collection reportedly includes religious sculptures depicting deities such as Lord Krishna, Lord Rama and Tirupati Balaji, along with several elephant tusks. The total weight of the declared ivory artefacts is estimated to be around 46 kilograms.

The development comes against the backdrop of a case dating back to 2011, when authorities first discovered elephant tusks and ivory items at Mohanlal’s residence in Kochi.

Forest officials said the actor had previously disclosed possession of four elephant tusks. The latest declaration includes six additional tusks and 13 ivory-based artefacts, prompting officials to undertake a fresh examination of the collection. Authorities are also considering scientific verification, including DNA testing, to establish the origin and authenticity of the items.

Mohanlal has maintained that the objects were either inherited or received as gifts and were not acquired through illegal means.

The controversy began during an Income Tax Department search operation at the actor’s residence in the Thevara area of Kochi in 2011. While the raid was reportedly focused on financial documents and related records, officials came across elephant tusks and ivory artefacts displayed inside the house.

Under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, possession of elephant ivory is heavily regulated, and ownership requires compliance with specific legal provisions and declarations. Following the discovery, forest authorities seized the items and initiated legal proceedings.

At the time, Mohanlal stated that the tusks belonged to a domesticated elephant that had died of natural causes. He argued that the tusks had been retained as memorabilia and claimed he was unaware of the legal requirements governing possession of such items.

Subsequent developments saw the Kerala government grant him permission to formally declare the tusks. In 2016, the actor was issued an ownership certificate, a move that later became the subject of legal challenges.

Over the years, the case has moved through multiple legal forums. Mohanlal challenged proceedings initiated by a lower court before the Kerala High Court and obtained interim relief for an extended period. He also sought withdrawal of the case through representations to the state government, but those requests were ultimately rejected.

A major turn came in 2025 when the Kerala High Court reportedly examined petitions filed by retired forest officials and wildlife conservation activists. During the proceedings, the court held that the ownership certificate granted to the actor was not legally sustainable and declared it invalid.

However, the court stopped short of directing criminal prosecution against the actor. The ruling nevertheless reopened questions regarding the status and origin of the ivory items linked to the case.

The latest declaration before the Forest Department is expected to become part of the ongoing verification process. Officials are now examining the newly disclosed items and assessing whether further investigation is required under wildlife protection laws.

The case has attracted significant public attention due to Mohanlal’s stature in the Indian film industry and the broader concerns surrounding wildlife conservation and illegal ivory possession. Conservation groups have long argued that strict enforcement of wildlife laws is necessary to discourage the trade and possession of protected animal products.

For now, the Forest Department is expected to continue its scrutiny of the declared artefacts while determining the next legal and procedural steps. Further action will likely depend on the outcome of scientific examinations and the findings of wildlife authorities.