Madras HC stays Centre's cattle-slaughter ban

As the cattle sale for slaughter ban turned into a full blown political controversy, the Madras High Court Bench in Madurai on Tuesday stayed the Central notification for four weeks. A division bench comprising Justice MV Muralidharan and Justice CV Karthikeyan granted an interim stay for four weeks on the Public Interest Litigations (PIL) challenging the constitutional validity of the rules notified under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulation of Livestock Markets) Act.

Meanwhile, Union Minister M Venkaiah Naidu on Tuesday said that the government is in process of examining the many public representations opposing the ban. His statement came in wake of an uneasiness being felt within the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), whose leaders from the North-East and Kerala have voiced opposition. Lok Sabha MP and National People's Party president Conrad K Sangma, a constituent of the NDA on Tuesday shot a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi urging him to de-notify the new rules in the "larger interest of the people." Naidu, however, stopped short of saying if the government would really reconsider its decision.

In Madurai, petitioners Selvagomathy and Asik Ilahi Bhava contended that the rules should be quashed as they were against the Constitution, breaching the principle of federalism and were contrary to the parent legislation — cruelty to animals Act.

Referring to the contention of the petitioners that the notification was related to food and hence ought to have been approved by Parliament, the judges asked the Centre to respond in four weeks.

The notification issued last week stated that cattle cannot be sold for slaughter at animal markets across India. Bulls, bullocks, cows, buffaloes, steers, heifers and calves, and camels are covered under the notification. It had created a widespread stir across the country with the Opposition leaders calling the move "unconstitutional" and "anti-democratic".

Stating that it would be incorrect to say that the government wants to restrict food habits of the people, Naidu said the notification banning cow slaughter was in response to a Supreme Court's observation. His colleague in the NDA Sangma said the rules would not stand the test of the Constitutionality as it imposes unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right to carry on any trade or occupation, he said that the Rules also violate the basic right of a person to freedom of choice regarding his/her food.

The PILs sought to quash the Rules 22(b)(iii) and 22(e) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulations of Livestock Markets) Rules, 2017, on the grounds that they were contrary to the parent Act of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, which specifically states that it shall not be an offence to kill any animal in a manner required by the religion of any community and the country's Constitution. The petitioners contended that the "provisions breached the cardinal principle of federalism" as it amounted to legislation in the fields earmarked for the state legislature.

They said that the slaughtering of animals for food and offering sacrifice in religious places were a part and parcel of the cultural identity of most of the communities in the country. "Prohibiting the sale of cattle for slaughter in animal markets amounted to interfering with the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution," they said.

Stating that the farmers and other traders involved in the sale of cattle, slaughterhouses and its employees would be gravely deprived of their right to livelihood, they said that the right to choice of food (non-vegetarian or vegetarian) was part of the right to personal liberty and conscience and privacy. "By imposing a ban on the slaughter of animals for food, the citizens with a choice to eat the flesh of such animals would be deprived of such food and it violates the right to food, privacy and personal liberty," the petitioners said.

Referring to the seventh schedule to the Constitution, the petitioner said that issues concerning markets, fairs and preservation or protection and improvement of livestock fall within entry 28 and 15 of the State list and thus only the state legislature and not the Centre were empowered to enact laws and frame statutory rules on those subjects. Anti-social elements were policing shops and houses of persons belonging to minority and Dalit communities and had been attacking shops sighting the impugned provisions, they alleged and urged the court to intervene.