2023

Trending Today ANIMAL CRUELTY CONTROVERSY: HOW THE 2023 SCC DECISION AFFECT JALIKATTU Role of technology in transforming the Indian judiciary COMMON CAUSE v. UNION OF INDIA 2018 Legal Framework governing reproductive rights and abortion law The Impact of Contract Law on E-Commerce and Online Transactions Indian Parliament Addressing Judicial Issues in Revenge Porn Cases Triviality section 95 INDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION v. STATE OF KERALA & Ors Legal Framework governing reproductive rights and abortion law ANIMAL CRUELTY CONTROVERSY: HOW THE 2023 SCC DECISION AFFECT JALIKATTU 27 Feb 2025 Introduction Violent acts against animals and traditional customs have long been at odds with each other, particularly in countries like India, where cultural legacy and modern ethics sometimes conflict. One of the most heated controversies in recent years has centred on Jallikattu, an ancestral bull-taming sport popular in Tamil Nadu. The 2023 case of Animal Welfare Board of India vs. Union of India (2023 SCC Online SC 661) demonstrates the continuous legal and ethical conflict between animal rights activists and cultural supporters. This case provides an important prism through which to evaluate the bigger problems of animal welfare, cultural rights, and legal interpretations in contemporary India. Overview on Jallikattu Jallikattu is an old sport that has been played for almost 2,000 years and is traditionally celebrated during Tamil Nadu’s Pongal festival, which celebrates the harvest. Contestants attempt to catch a bull by the hump and ride it as long as possible, or to bring it to a halt. Proponents claim that Jallikattu is more than a sport; it is a symbol of Tamil culture and identity. They argue it serves an important role in protecting indigenous cattle breeds, strengthening community relationships, and honouring courage. Nevertheless, animal rights organisations, like the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), claim that Jallikattu subjected bulls to severe brutality and stress. There have been reports of bulls being force-fed alcohol, having their tails twisted or bitten, and being physically assaulted in order to induce violence. These behaviours raise serious questions regarding animal care and the ethical implications of carrying on such a tradition in contemporary society. Judicial Trail Heading to 2023 The legal battle over Jallikattu has been going on for more than a decade. In 2014, the Supreme Court of India prohibited Jallikattu, alleging animal cruelty and protecting animal rights under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act of 1960. The moratorium was a big success for animal rights campaigners, but it sparked widespread demonstrations in Tamil Nadu, where Jallikattu is regarded as an important part of cultural legacy. In the wake of popular outrage, the Tamil Nadu government issued a resolution in 2017 that permitted Jallikattu, which was eventually adopted by Parliament. The ordinance was challenged in the Supreme Court, sparking a complicated legal process that resulted in the 2023 decision. The 2023 Supreme Court Judgement: Critical Arguments In the case of Animal Welfare Board of India vs. Union of India (2023 SCC Online SC 661), the court had to balance cultural rights with animal welfare. The case featured comments from both sides, illustrating the deep-seated tensions and complexities of the matter. Claims for Jallikattu Cultural Heritage and Identity: Proponents, including the Tamil Nadu government, contended that Jallikattu is a centuries-old ritual rooted in Tamil culture. They contended that prohibiting the sport would violate the Tamil people’s cultural rights, which are protected by Article 29 of the Indian Constitution. Socioeconomic and Humanitarian consequences: Supporters emphasised Jallikattu’s economic benefits, such as preserving indigenous cow breeds. They suggested that the sport encourages farmers to raise local bulls, so improving biodiversity and livelihoods in the countryside. Statutory Mechanisms: The Tamil Nadu government convinced the court that measures have been implemented to reduce animal cruelty. These included veterinarian checks, sport-specific laws and regulations, and penalties for violators. They argued that these procedures would safeguard the bulls’ care while allowing the custom to continue. Arguments Against Jallikattu. Animal Mistreatment: The AWBI along with different animal rights groups provided considerable proof of bull cruelty during Jallikattu. They contended that no amount of regulation could overcome the sport’s intrinsic brutality, in which the primary goal is to irritate and dominate the animal. Legal precedents and animal rights: They emphasised earlier Supreme Court rulings, including the 2014 decision that recognised animal rights under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. They contended that permitting Jallikattu would undermine animal protection laws and set an undesirable precedent. Ethical dilemmas: Beyond legal considerations, animal rights campaigners invoked broader ethical concerns, suggesting that cultural practices must adapt to changing society norms. They argued that cruelty to animals cannot be justified in the sake of tradition. The Judgement and its repercussions The Supreme Court’s 2023 decision was a careful attempt to manage the delicate nexus of cultural rights and animal welfare. The court acknowledged Jallikattu’s traditional significance while emphasising the importance of ensuring the welfare of the animals involved. The decision permitted Jallikattu to continue, but only with strict controls intended at reducing cruelty and guaranteeing adherence to animal welfare standards. The primary provisions of the judgement Regulatory Oversight: The court mandated independent panels to oversee Jallikattu tournaments. These committees are responsible for ensuring that the regulations are rigorously observed and that any incidents of cruelty are swiftly addressed. Veterinary Care: The judgement emphasised the importance of complete veterinary care before, during, and after the occurrence. Bulls must be tested for fitness, and any bull judged to be unfit is not permitted to compete. Training and Recognition: The court directed the Tamil Nadu government to instruct organisers and participants on animal care norms. This involves educating them on the legal and ethical duties associated with running the sport. Repercussions: Violations of regulations may result in fines and imprisonment. The court warned that any violation from the stipulated norms would result in severe repercussions. larger consequences for animal welfare and cultural practices. The 2023 decision in Animal Welfare Board of India vs. Union of India is significant not only for Jallikattu, but also for the larger discussion of