Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

68. Article 51-A(h) says that it shall be the duty of every citizen to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform. Particular emphasis has been made to the expression "humanism" which has a number of meanings, but increasingly designates as an inclusive sensibility for our species. Humanism also means, to understand benevolence, compassion, mercy, etc. Citizens should, therefore, develop a spirit of compassion and humanism which is reflected in the Preamble of the PCA Act as well as in Sections 3 and 11 of the Act. To look after the welfare and well-being of the animals and the duty to prevent the infliction of pain or suffering on animals highlights the principles of humanism in Article 51-A(h). Both Articles 51-A(g) and (h) have to be read into the PCA Act, especially into Section 3 and Section 11 of the PCA Act and be applied and enforced.

74. We are, therefore, of the view that Sections 21 and 22 of the PCA Act and the relevant provisions have to be understood in the light of the rights conferred on animals under Section 3, read with Sections 11(1)(a) and (o) and Articles 51-A(g) and (h) of the Constitution, and if so read, in our view, bulls cannot be used as performing animals for Jallikattu and bullock cart race, since they are basically draught and pack animals, not anatomically designed for such performances.

82. Section 3 has been specifically enacted, as already indicated, to confer duties on persons who are in-charge or care of the animals, which says, it is the duty of such persons to ensure the well-being of such animals and to prevent infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering upon the animals. In other words, the well-being and welfare of the animals is the paramount and dominant intention of the PCA Act and with that intention it has conferred duties on the person in-charge or care of the animals and corresponding rights on the animals. Section 11 confers obligations on all persons, including persons-in-charge or care of the animals to see that Section 3 has been fully obeyed. Exemptions to Section 11 have been provided in sub-section (3) on the doctrine of necessity, which concept we have already dealt with in the earlier part of the judgment. Section 22 of the PCA Act, which deals with "performing animals", has to be read along with Sections 3, 11(1) and 11(3) of the Act and that expects only the animal to perform in an exhibition and bull tamers have no role unlike the TNRJ Act. Sections 21 and 22 refer to training of animals for performance and not training to withstand the onslaught of bull tamers. Sections 3, 11 or 22 do not confer any right on the human beings to overpower the animals while it is performing, on the other hand, under Section 11(1)(m), inciting an animal to fight is an offence.

2. The Bill seeks to give effect to the above decisions."

86. Section 4 deals with the responsibility of the organisers. Section 4(iii) provides for double barricade area in order to avoid injuries to the spectators and bystanders, the prime consideration is, therefore, to avoid injuries to spectators and bystanders and not that of the animal. Section 4(iv) deals with the fixing of the gallery for the spectators to sit and watch the event. Section 4(vi) empowers the Animal Husbandry Department to test the bulls to ensure that performance enhancement drugs are not administered. Duties have also been assigned to the District Collector, under Section 5 of the Act, to ensure safety of the spectators and to see that bulls are free from diseases and not intoxicated or administered with any substance like nicotine, cocaine, etc. to make them more aggressive and ferocious. Sections 5(ix) and (x) authorise the District Collector to give wider publicity to the provisions of the PCA Act and the Rules made thereunder and to ensure the presence of animal welfare activists of AWBI during the conduct of the event. Section 7 deals with penalty, it says "whoever contravenes the provisions of this Act shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both". Section 11 of the PCA Act, it may be noted, provides for imprisonment for a term which may extend maximum to three months, to that extent, there is inconsistency between Section 7 of the TNRJ Act as well as Section 11 of the PCA Act.

89. The TNRJ Act, in its Objects and Reasons, speaks of ancient culture and tradition and also safety of animals, participants and spectators. The PCA Act was enacted at a time when it was noticed that in order to reap maximum gains, the animals were being exploited by human beings, by using coercive methods and by inflicting unnecessary pain. The PCA Act was, therefore, passed to prevent infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering and for the well-being and welfare of the animals and to preserve the natural instinct of the animal. Overpowering the performing animal was never in the contemplation of the PCA Act and, in fact, under Section 3 of the PCA Act, a statutory duty has been cast on the person who is in-charge or care of the animal to ensure the well-being of such animal and to prevent infliction on the animal of unnecessary pain or suffering. The PCA Act, therefore, casts not only duties on human beings, but also confer corresponding rights on animals, which is being taken away by the State Act (the TNRJ Act) by conferring rights on the organisers and bull tamers, to conduct Jallikattu, which is inconsistent and in direct collision with Section 3, Section 11(1)(a), Section 11(1)(m)(ii) and Section 22 of the PCA Act read with Articles 51-A(g) and (h) of the Constitution and hence repugnant to the PCA Act, which is a welfare legislation and hence declared unconstitutional and void, being violative of Article 254(1) of the Constitution of India. 91.11. The TNRJ Act is found repugnant to the PCA Act, which is a welfare legislation, hence held constitutionally void, being violative of Article 254(1) of the Constitution of India.