New Delhi: Jallikattu (taming of the bull) is impermissible in Tamil Nadu as ‘bull’ cannot be used as a tool for entertainment for the human beings by inflicting cruelty, the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday.
A Bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman made this oral observation during the hearing of petitions filed by animal rights activists, Compassion Unlimited Plus Action, the Animal Welfare Board and others challenging the Centre’s notification.
The January 7, 2016 notification permitted Jallikattu and bullock cart races by excluding ‘bull’ in the list of ‘performing animals’ under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.The animals mentioned the list cannot be used for any performance or entertainment and by removing ‘bull’, from this list the Centre indirectly allowed Jallikattu.
At the outset Senior Counsel Shekar Naphade, appearing for Tamil Nadu submitted that the petition seeking review of the 2014 judgment banning Jallikattu should be heard first before these petitions are taken up. The bench after an enquiry with the ‘registry’ told the Counsel that the review petition is under defect.
Additional Solicitor General P.S. Narasimha, appearing for the Centre justified the notification and said bull is not a performing animal and Jallikattu is not a performance but a sport to test the valour and strength of the participants.
Apart from being a part of Tamil culture and heritage Jallikattu is also integral to the religious beliefs and sentiments of the several village communities to mark harvest festival. Jallikattu is not an entertainment as the object was welfare and maintenance of bulls which is part of Tamil culture.
He said sufficient guidelines had been formulated and care had been taken to ensure that bulls are not subjected to any cruelty and no injury is inflicted on the bulls.
Justice Misra, however, questioned the Centre for allowing Jallikattu and asked “How can you allow bull to be a source of entertainment for human beings? Jallikattu is impermissible as it violates the provisions of PCA Act and the Constitution. In view of the cruelties inflicted on the animal, nothing of this nature is permissible. There is a dichotomy. On the one hand you want compassion towards cow, on the other hand you want to use bull as a tool for entertainment for human mind. If we go by constitutional principles of compassion, such a contradiction cannot be permitted. Even if you say that Jallikattu is a sport, it is not permissible. You better play computer games for entertainment.”
Justice Nariman intervened and said “By this notification you (government) has removed the basis of the 2014 judgment banning Jallikattu. You want to allow it without imposing cruelty to the animal. How such a contradiction be allowed. Prima facie the amended provision seems to be ultra vires the PCA Act.”
When ASG Narasimha said the 2014 judgment was based on the premise that animals have a right, which is not correct, Justice Misra retorted “there is negation of a right to make this kind of entertainment. By saying that you have imposed certain conditions for conducting Jallikattu, you (Centre) have hurt the Constitution.”
