Plea Against Cow Slaughter, Elephant Poaching, Animal Killing Closed By Supreme Court

FACTS OF THE CASE

• This petition was filed against the millions of cows, elephants and other animals being slaughtered.
• They are getting killed or maimed for their meat and to protect the crops from getting damaged.
• This clearly violated Articles 48, 48A and 51A (g) of the Constitution of India.

LEGAL PROVISIONS

• Article 48: Article 48 of the Constitution of India directs the state to make provisions for banning animal slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle, and to plan in agriculture and animal husbandry.
• Article 48A: Article 48A of the Indian Constitution talks about the protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding the forests and wild life. It mentions that the State must take steps to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.
• Article 51A(g): This article puts a duty on the citizens of India and directs them to protect and improve the natural environment and have compassion for all living creatures.

ARGUMENTS BY NEDUMPARA

• Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, representing the petitioner, argued that killing the animals in the most inhumane way not only violated Articles 48, 48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution of India but various other acts, regulations and rules framed by the Parliament, and by the various State Assemblies, Centre and State Governments.
• He submitted that, while the poachers killing the wild animals, boars, deer, elephants, Bisons go scot-free, the poor farmers and Adivasis who lost their crops, remain without any remedy.
• He further argued that although there are laws for the protection of wildlife and forest dwellers but they are not being implemented effectively.
• There is no machinery present to ensure that these laws are getting enforced.
• He stated that a right which has been recognized by law, without any means of its enforcement, is not a right at all.
• He requested the court to bring in a machinery which would enforce the laws and adjudicate the claims of compensation of the victims.

OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE COURT

• The Division Bench comprising of Justice S.K. Kaul and Dinesh Maheswari observed that the executive has to take action on the matter of enforcement.
• The court then disposed the plea and stated that the prayers are extremely wide and varied, due to which it would be difficult to provide any direction in this regard.
• It examined three aspects (a) Enforcement of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, (b)The Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 and The Indian Forest Act, 1927 and (c)The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and held that, the executive must take necessary steps to uphold the true intent and spirits of the legislation.

WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS ABOUT IT?