Supreme Court Upholds Legality of Bovine Sports Jallikattu with Diluted Regulations

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the legality of bovine sports, including Jallikattu, Kambala, and Bullock Cart Race, while introducing substantial regulatory measures to minimize cruelty to animals. The ruling comes after considering the constitutional validity of the Amendment Acts passed by the states of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, and Karnataka, which sought to revive these traditional sports while ensuring the welfare of the participating animals.

The case revolved around the interpretation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, specifically Sections 3 and 11(1)(a) and (m), which aim to prevent cruelty to animals. The petitioners argued that these bovine sports were in violation of the provisions of the 1960 Act and sought to have the Amendment Acts struck down as unconstitutional. They contended that the participation of bulls in these sports caused unnecessary pain and suffering.

The Supreme Court, however, held that the Amendment Acts, when read along with the respective Rules and Notifications, addressed the issue of cruelty to animals and substantially diluted the pain-inflicting practices involved in these sports. The court emphasized that the provisions of the 1960 Act must be balanced with the cultural and traditional significance of these sports, while also ensuring the welfare of the animals involved.

Regarding Jallikattu, the court acknowledged its historical and cultural significance in Tamil Nadu but refrained from conclusively determining whether it constituted an integral part of the state's cultural heritage. The court stated that such a determination should be left to the legislature, as long as the activity did not violate the provisions of the 1960 Act. The Amendment Acts, along with the introduced regulations, were deemed to minimize cruelty to animals in these sports.

Furthermore, the court dismissed the argument that the Amendment Acts infringed upon the constitutional rights of animals. It clarified that the Constitution does not recognize fundamental rights for animals and that the protection against cruelty must be balanced with other societal considerations.

The judgment also addressed the "Doctrine of Pith and Substance," determining that the Amendment Acts were primarily aimed at preventing cruelty to animals, which fell within the legislative jurisdiction assigned to the respective states. The court rejected the contention that the Amendment Acts were colorable legislation and held that they were valid legislative actions.

Supreme Court upheld the legality of Jallikattu, Kambala, and Bullock Cart Race, while ensuring that the welfare of the animals involved was protected. The court emphasized the importance of balancing cultural traditions with the prevention of cruelty to animals and urged strict enforcement of the amended laws and regulations by the authorities.

D.D: May 18, 2023

THE ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD OF   INDIA & ORS.   vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR.