Common Object Need Not Be Pre-Formed – It Can Develop Instantly During the Incident: Allahabad High Court Upholds Murder Convictions in Group Assault Case Mere Designation as Director Not Enough to Attract Criminal Liability Under Section 141 NI Act: Gujarat High Court Quashes Complaint Against Director Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Proceed with Award Based on Unstamped Agreement: Orissa High Court Quashes Award for Patent Illegality No Doctor While Treating a Patient Can Be Presumed to Intend Wrongful Loss to the Patient or Family: Telangana High Court Slams Criminal Prosecution in Absence of Prima Facie Evidence Right to Education Includes the Right to Learn Remotely—Arbitrary Territorial Limits Cannot Override Lawful Degrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Strikes Down UGC Notifications A Person Performing Higher Duties Cannot Be Paid for a Lower Post: Orissa High Court Orders Reconsideration of Widow Employee’s Regularisation as Cashier Instead of Peon Long Detention Cannot Defeat the Gravity of Fraud: Delhi High Court Denies Bail in Rs.1.73 Crore Investment Scam Youth Entrapped in Digital Seduction—Not a Spy with Malicious Intent: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in Naval Dockyard Espionage Case Mere Apprehension Cannot Justify Transfer of Execution Proceedings: Andhra Pradesh HC Rejects Allegations of Bias Against Judicial Officer Prosecution Must Prove the Right Person Was Tried — You Can’t Convict One for Another’s Crime: Supreme Court Acquits Woman in Ganja Case for Mistaken Identity Section 269ST IT Act | Courts Must Report Cash Transactions Exceeding ₹2 Lakh in Property Deals to Income Tax Department: Supreme Court Agreement to Sell Does Not Create Right to Sue Against Third Parties: Supreme Court Rejects Injunction Suit by Non-Owner on Unregistered Contract Once a Court Has Already Decided the Issue, Raising the Same Allegations in a New Criminal Case Is an Abuse of Process: Supreme Court Applies Res Judicata to Criminal Proceedings Military Nursing Service Is ‘Part of the Armed Forces of the Union’ — Exclusion from Ex-Servicemen Quota Is Impermissible: Supreme Court State Rules Cannot Override Central Tax Framework — Rajasthan Rule Cancelling C-Forms Declared Ultra Vires: Supreme Court Quashes Rule 17(20) of Rajasthan CST Rules Right to Pension Is Not Immutable Merely Because an Option Was Exercised: Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Pension Scheme for PSU Retirees

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

Similar News