Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. Dr. Singhvi, learned senior counsel, who has entered caveat, would submit that the analysis made by the two-Judge Bench in A. Nagaraja (supra) as regards repugnancy cannot be flawed in view of the principles laid down by this Court in Deep Chand vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and others2. It is urged by him that there is a direct collision between the two enactments inasmuch as the one stands for welfare of the animals treating them with kindness and compassion and the other compels them to participate in an event for satisfying inferior pleasures which are associated with adventure 2 AIR 1959 SC 648 (sophistically called a sport) of man. Additionally, it is submitted by Dr. Singhvi, that the 1960 Act covers the entire field and there is no scope for the State legislature to bring such law that would frontally run counter to the PCA Act. It is further urged by him that the State legislation remotely has no connection with Entries 14 and 15 of the State List but both the Acts have the root in Entry 17 of the Concurrent List.

“The universe along with its creatures belongs to the land. No creature is superior to any other. Human beings should not be above nature. Let no one species encroach over the rights and privileges of other species.”

21. We do not think allusion to Isha-Upanishad in the context of animal welfare is alien to the context. The Court, we are inclined to think, while dealing with law and legal principles can refer to the cultural ethos and the ancient texts of this country as far as they do not run counter to constitutional and statutory thought and principle. As far as the international concept is concerned that pertains to the thinking that “the world that is thought to be big is not that big” or for that matter reference to various concepts that relate to compassion to animals and the steps taken. We do not perceive any legal infirmity in the same. It cannot be said that the reference is unwarrantable. On the contrary, they present a holistic analysis that is in consonance with our constitutional value. We must say the criticism is unfair. We are obliged to say so, for philosophy of compassion can have manifold articulations.

26

ITEM NO.301                  COURT NO.4                SECTION PIL(W)

               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F        I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                    Writ Petition (Civil) No.24/2016

COMPASSION UNLIMITED PLUS ACTION                       Petitioner(s)
                                         VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.                                Respondent(s)

(With (With (With appln.(s) for intervention and appln.(s) for directions and appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) (With appln.(s) for interim relief and interim relief and office report) (With appln.(s) for directions and office report) Office Report) (With appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and office report) R.P.(C) D 17089/2014 In C.A. No. 5387/2014 (With appln.(s) for stay and Office Report) R.P.(C) D 8043/2016 In C.A. No. 5387/2014 (With appln.(s) for application for permission to file review petition and office report) Date : 16/11/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.