138 NI Act | Admission Of Signatures On Cheque Triggers Statutory Presumption Of Debt: Punjab & Haryana HC Magistrate Cannot Straightaway Issue NBW For Non-Appearance If Accused Is Already On Bail; Bail Valid Until Cancelled: Orissa High Court Bank Cannot Dishonour Cheques Merely Because Account Title Changed From Partnership To Proprietorship: Madhya Pradesh High Court Environmental Clearance Is Site-Specific; Violations At Different Site By Related Entity Not Ground To Deny New EC: Kerala High Court Advocate’s Failure To Formally Prove Fee Bill Not Fatal To Claim If Oral Evidence Establishes Non-Payment Of Agreed Professional Fees: Delhi High Court Police Officers Cannot Fight Over Specific Postings; Disciplined Force Must Prioritize Public Interest Over Location: Karnataka High Court RERA Section 18 Interest For Delayed Possession Is An Unqualified Absolute Right; Notice Under Section 55 Contract Act Not Required: Bombay High Court State Cannot Hand Over Additional Charge Of Sensitive Posts To Tainted Officers Facing Disciplinary Action: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mandatory Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Essential If Accused Resides Outside Jurisdiction; Commercial Breach Not Criminal Offence: Calcutta High Court Disciplinary Enquiry Cannot Be Quashed Merely For Delay In Conclusion; 6-Month Timeline Under G.O.Ms.No.679 Is Directory: Andhra Pradesh High Court Exoneration In Adjudication Proceedings No Bar To Criminal Prosecution If CBI Collects Independent Evidence Of Forgery & Conspiracy: Bombay High Court Public Prosecutor Not A 'Post Office' Of Investigating Agency; Independent Application Of Mind Mandatory For Extending Remand Beyond 180 Days Under NDPS Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Complainant Cannot Use Section 311 CrPC To Reopen Pre-Charge Stage After Explicit Waiver & Framing Of Charges: Allahabad High Court Bomb Blast In Train Is An 'Accident' Under Railways Act, Union Of India Liable To Pay Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Bail Hearing Can Proceed In Informant's Absence If Notice Was Served Despite Section 483(2) BNSS Mandate: Allahabad High Court

Strict Adherence to By-laws Essential for Urban Safety in Stray Cattle Management ,Rules High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court directs Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh to enforce stringent measures to mitigate stray cattle menace.

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the states of Punjab, Haryana, and the Union Territory of Chandigarh to enforce stringent by-laws for the management of stray cattle. The decision, issued by a bench comprising Acting Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Vikas Bahl, emphasized the importance of these measures to ensure public safety and mitigate the risks associated with stray cattle in urban areas.

The case arose from two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners sought directives for the construction and management of cattle pounds in Punjab, Haryana, and Chandigarh to address the increasing menace of stray cattle. The PIL highlighted the need for comprehensive infrastructure to confine stray animals and prevent accidents and injuries caused by them.The court meticulously examined the affidavits and status reports submitted by the states and UT, detailing measures taken to address the issue. The State of Punjab reported the existence of 457 Gaushalas (cattle pounds) receiving substantial financial assistance. Haryana and Chandigarh also provided details on fines imposed, cattle impoundment statistics, and vaccination programs. The court acknowledged these efforts and advised the states to consider adopting uniform by-laws to enhance efficacy in handling stray cattle issues.

“Once the Rules and By-laws have been made applicable in urban areas, the relief sought has been reasonably redressed,” the court noted. It stressed that the purpose of the PILs had been fulfilled, provided the states ensure strict adherence to the by-laws and undertake regular exercises to pick up stray cattle from urban areas.

The judgment emphasized the necessity of proactive measures by urban local bodies to mitigate the risks posed by stray cattle. “On account of heavy vehicular traffic flow in urban areas, the menace of stray cattle, whether moving or stationary, can lead to injuries and accidents, sometimes proving fatal,” the court observed. It highlighted the importance of sensitivity in executing these measures, considering the potential for serious accidents involving stray cattle.

Justice Sandhawalia remarked, “The State shall ensure that the exercise of picking up stray cattle is done with proper sensitivity, as the menace of stray cattle can lead to injuries and accidents, sometimes proving fatal to pedestrians and drivers.”

The High Court’s directive mandates strict enforcement of existing by-laws and encourages states to adopt best practices from other jurisdictions to create a uniform framework for managing stray cattle. This landmark decision aims to enhance urban safety and underscores the judiciary’s commitment to addressing public interest concerns through effective legal measures. The ruling is expected to have a far-reaching impact on urban management and public safety protocols concerning stray cattle.

 

Date of Decision: 03.07.2024

Jatinder Jain   VS State of Haryana and others

Latest Legal News