Sacrifice ‘bakra’ on Bakra Eid, not camel: Madras High Court
Chennai: The Madras High Court has directed the committee it formed to make suggestions regarding camel slaughter to ensure that no unlawful activity happens on Bakrid. Disposing a petition moved by Animal Welfare Board of India representative Radha Rajan, the First Bench comprising Chief Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice T.S. Sivagnanam said that the illegality of camel slaughtering had nothing to do with the constitutional freedom to practice one’s religion.
The CJ’s remark was prompted by the opposition counsel’s argument that banning camel slaughter would amount to violation of Article 25 and 26 of the Indian constitution, which guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion and freedom to manage religious affairs.
When the petitioner's counsel argued that the Food Safety and Standards Regulations, 2011 clearly stated that camel meat was not for consumption, the opposition counsel retorted pointing out there are people who consume cats and rats.
The CJ, asking the opposition to explain the point, said that to the best of his knowledge Bakrid was when Bakra (Goat) was slaughtered and asked the opposition whether the camel was native to Tamil Nadu.
The opposition also stated that camel slaughtering is permitted by the Islamic Holy Book of Quran but the Bench did not entertain the argument. Considering the petitioner's plea for interim orders, the Bench said, "We have already issued appropriate directions in the main matters and we are assured by the respondents that the law will be followed and illegal import of camel is already being prevented."
"The petitioner in fact is a part of the committee itself. Thus, all the pleas the petitioner seeks to raise would also have to be dealt with by the committee." When told by the petitioner that the committee had asked her to present her objections to the court citing the appropriate law, so that the court is in a position to interpret the law, the Bench said that it was displeased to find the committee passing the ball to the court, once again. "The laws are clear. What is there to interpret?" the bench asked.
"We leave it open to the petitioner to raise all issues in the committee and we would examine the issue in the main matters. The respondent administration will specially keep in mind the observations made by us in para no.9 and 10 of our order dated August 25, 2015 in WPs as well as Food Safety and Standards Regulations, to prevent any illegal slaughtering. Petition is closed," the Bench observed.
