Animals fight every day to survive on a global scale. Even in severe weather, they are harassed into working hard. They endure excruciating physical suffering that finally results in death. Tamed animals are frequently mistreated in order to maintain good discipline, which goes against ethical standards. These helpless animals were exploited by avaricious and self-centered people for their own financial gain. Some greedy people are now taking advantage of a world that is supposed to care for every species. animal welfare board of india vs a nagaraja is a well-known case pertaining to the same matter. The use of bulls and other animals for financial gain is the subject of this lawsuit.
animal welfare board of india vs a nagaraja Case Facts
- In this situation, the preservation of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Karnataka’s cultures and traditions coexists with a pressing issue pertaining to animal rights, specifically those of bulls.
- The main focus of this case is the entertainment sport known as “Jallikattu,” which is played on Pongal. In this sport, competitors control a swift bull with gold or silver coins tied to its horns, and the object of the game is to get onto the bull’s hump.
- In 2006, an appeal was launched to outlaw “Jallikattu” due to the abuse of bulls, which violates both Article 51 A (g) and Sections 3 and 11 (a) of the Indian Constitution and the prevention of cruelty to animals act, 1960. The practice of Jallikattu was discontinued in 2011 when the Central Government added bulls to the list of animals whose training and exhibition were forbidden.
- Later, in February 2018, the Tamil Nadu government’s legislation containing the rules governing the practice of Jallikattu was contested by the Animal Welfare Board of India. As a result, the ban was lifted, and the Supreme Court was consulted about this decision.
- A five-judge Supreme Court constitution bench just overturned its previous ruling in May 2023, allowing bull taming sports including bullock cart races, kambala, and jallikattu.
animal welfare board of india vs a nagaraja Issues
- Do animals also have the right to life and the ability to live with dignity, and do they fall under the same protections as people under article 21 of the indian constitution?
- Violating Article 51 A (g) and (h) because it encourages the bull taming sport, which places an obligation on all people to conserve the environment and cultivate a scientific temper.
- In opposition to the animal cruelty prevention act of 1960’s sections 3 and 11 (a)
Contentions by the Parties
Favour:
- The people of Tamil Nadu celebrate Jallikattu as a religious and cultural occasion.
- It further stated that any prohibition on these activities would be interpreted as going against community sensitivity.
- The school curriculum includes instruction on the event’s traditional and cultural significance.
- The state makes money from the Jallikattu practice.
- Police are always on duty during the festival to prevent animal cruelty, and no animals are harmed during the event.
Opposition:
- Bulls have not been the only animals to suffer injuries and deaths.
- Animals were subjected to severe brutality, according to AWBI, and coerced into taking part.
- There was insufficient evidence to support Jallikattu’s cultural significance.
- According to AWBI, their investigation revealed that in addition to being beaten and tortured, animals were depriving of their basic necessities, such as food, water, and sanitary conditions.
- It is against article 21 of the indian constitution, which upholds human rights and protects life, which has been defined to encompass animal life.
animal welfare board of india vs a nagaraja Judgment
- Regarding Jallikattu, bullock-cart races, and other similar events that violate Sections 3, 11(1)(a), and 11(1)(m)(ii) of the prevention of cruelty to animals act, the court upheld the “animal welfare board of india” position. It affirmed the Central Government’s 11.7.2011 announcement that forbade the usage of bulls in these kinds of ceremonies in Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and other states.
- The court ruled that bulls’ rights under Sections 3 and 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, as well as Articles 51A(g) and (h), cannot be violated unless specifically authorized by Sections 11(3) and 28 of the same Act. It placed a strong emphasis on the governments, Union Territories, MoEF, and Animal Welfare Board of India defending the five freedoms.
- Governments and the Animal Welfare Board of India were directed to uphold Sections 3 and 11 of the prevention of cruelty to animals act, which guarantees animal welfare and prohibits needless suffering. The Indian Animal Welfare Board is responsible for enforcing compliance with Section 11(1)(m)(ii), which forbids inciting animals to fight.
- The court recommended that, in accordance with international norms, animal rights be raised to constitutional rights. Officials who disregarded the prevention of cruelty to animals act were to be disciplined by the government; also, the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act was declared unconstitutional since it violated Article 254(1) of the Indian Constitution.
- The prevention of cruelty to animals act’s requirements must be quickly put into practice by the animal welfare board of india. It must work with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to accomplish this goal and report infractions to the relevant governments so that corrective action can be taken.
For any latest news, legal topics, judiciary exams notifications, patterns, etc watch Jyoti Judiciary’s YouTube channel for legal videos for any updates at https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=2cwubh9d2A9urwJf
