With reference to Indian laws about wildlife protection, consider the following statements:

1. Wild animals are the sole property of the government.
2. When a wild animal is declared protected, such animal is entitled for equal protection whether it is found in protected areas or outside.
3. Apprehension of a protected wild animal becoming a danger to human life is sufficient ground for its capture or killing.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

The correct option is 1 and 2.

Let us analyze each statement step-by-step to understand why they are correct or incorrect under Indian wildlife protection laws:

Statement 1 is correct:
Under Section 39 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, wild animals are considered the property of the government. Specifically, it states that every wild animal (other than vermin) which is hunted, kept, or bred in captivity, or found dead, or killed by mistake, becomes the property of the State Government (or the Central Government in certain cases). The Supreme Court of India has also reinforced in various judgments that wild animals are indeed the sole property of the government.

Statement 2 is correct:
The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, does not differentiate the status of a protected animal based on its location. Once a wild animal is declared protected under the Schedules of the Act, it is entitled to equal protection under the law, regardless of whether it is found within designated protected areas (like National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries) or outside them (such as private lands or revenue forests).

Statement 3 is incorrect:
Under Section 11 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the Chief Wildlife Warden can permit the capture or killing of a wild animal specified in Schedule I if it has become dangerous to human life or is disabled or diseased beyond recovery. However, mere "apprehension" or fear that a protected animal might become a danger is not a sufficient ground for its capture or killing. There must be concrete evidence or an actual threat establishing that the animal has indeed become dangerous to human life. Thus, statement 3 is incorrect.

Therefore, statements 1 and 2 are correct, making 1 and 2 the correct option.