Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Bill ,2020: An Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The Karnataka government introduced the much controversial Prevention of Cattle Bill, 2020 which was adopted by the Karnataka Legislative Assembly. The Bill is yet to be passed by the State’s Legislative Council. The Bill seeks to impose almost a blanket ban upon the slaughtering of all cattle which includes cows, calves, bulls, and even buffaloes. However, in the case of he/she buffalo, the Bill seeks to ban their slaughter if the animals are below 13 years of age. It makes even selling /disposing of the cattle for slaughtering or intentionally killing the cattle an offence. The Bill was piloted by the Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Minister Prabhu Chauhan.

WHAT DOES THE BILL SAY?

Definitions

The Bill defines ‘Beef’ as the flesh of a cattle in any form. ‘Cattle’ is defined to include ‘cow’, ‘calf of a cow and bull’, ‘bullock’, and ‘he or she buffalo below the age of thirteen years’. The Bill also defines ‘Gau Shalas’ as shelters established for the protection and preservation of cattle registered with the Department of Animal Husbandry and Fisheries.

Penalties

A commission of an offence, which is cognizable, under the said legislation would attract imprisonment of not less than 3 years which could be extended to 7 years with a fine of not less than Rs. 50,000 per cattle which may extend to 7 lakh rupees or both. In case of subsequent commission of the offence, the fine imposed would be not less than 1 lakh rupees and which may extend to 10 lakh rupees along with imprisonment which may extend to 7 years. The court, upon the conviction of the accused, can forfeit the confiscated cattle, premises, vehicle, and material on behalf of the State government.

As per the legislation, a tahsildar or an officer not below the rank of a veterinary officer of the Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department can be appointed by the government as the competent authority to look into various issues surrounding and related to the slaughtering of cattle under the said Bill. The Bill further allows a police officer, not below the rank of a sub-inspector or any competent authority to visit the premises where any suspicious slaughtering is taking place. Such an officer or authority has the power to seize the premises, cattle, and materials. However, upon conviction of the accused, the said authority or officer, without any unreasonable delay, has to make a report before the sub-divisional magistrate who can then order confiscation of the property through a public auction, if such confiscation is needed. However, the Bill prohibits the selling of or returning the cattle to the owner in such cases instead prescribes that the cattle be handed over to government recognized cow shelters. The Bill further provides for the constitution of special courts for swift disposal of disputes under it. Further, the Bill also imposes the interstate transport of cattle without permission from a competent authority.

Exceptions under the Legislation

However, the Bill exempts the cattle which are operated for vaccine lymph, serum, or any other research or experimental purpose at any government or recognized institute from its ambit. Also, the Bill has made an exception as to slaughter of those cattle whose slaughtering is certified by a veterinary officer as being necessary for the interest of public health and where the cattle are suffering from any disease which is certified by the veterinary doctor as contagious and dangerous to other cattle. Similarly, the slaughter of terminally-ill cattle and buffalo above the age of 13 is allowed by the Bill but upon certification by the veterinary officer.

The Bill also states that no suit, prosecution, or other legal proceedings shall be initiated against the competent authority or any person exercising powers under this legislation in ‘good faith’.

IS A BAN ON COW SLAUGHTER CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID?

The cow slaughter laws in India vary from state to state and hence it is important to look up this issue of a ban on cow slaughter in light of the relevant constitutional provisions and the judicial view upon the matter.

It is argued that the complete ban on cow slaughter is in consonance with Articles 48 and 51A(g) of the Constitution of India. Article 48 being a Directive Principle of State Policy gives a directive to the State to endeavor to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall also take steps particularly to preserve and improve the breeds and prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves, and other milch and draught cattle. Further, Entry No. 15 in the State list gives power to the State Legislature to legislate for the preservation, protection, and improvement of stock and prevention of animal diseases, veterinary training, and practice. This means that the State Legislature has been given exclusive power to legislate upon the subject of cow slaughter.

Further, Article 51A(g) which is a Fundamental Duty states that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures.

The Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Hanif Qureshi & Ors. v. State of Bihar[1] held that a total ban on the slaughter of cattle is valid and in consonance with the directives under Article 48. A total ban on the slaughter of she-buffaloes and breeding bulls was also held to be reasonable and valid so long as the she-buffalo or breeding bull was capable of being used as milch or draught cattle.

Further, upon the question that whether the sacrifice of a cow on a particular Islamic festival was necessary and a total ban on the slaughter violated the fundamental right to religion of the Mussalman, the Supreme Court held:

“There is no material on the record before us which will enable us to say, in the face of the foregoing facts, that the sacrifice of a cow on that day is an obligatory overt act for a Mussalman to exhibit his religious belief and idea. In the premises, it is not possible for us to uphold this claim of the petitioners.”

However, in this case, the court did not provide an answer to the question as to whether a total ban on slaughter of the cattle was within the scope of the restrictions provided under Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India.

Another landmark and important judgment on cow slaughter is that of State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat[2].In the instant case a petition challenging the amendments in section 5 of the Bombay Animal Preservation, which was also applicable to the state of Gujarat. The amendments changed the ban on the slaughter of bulls and bullocks under the age of 16 to a complete ban.

The petition challenged the amendment because of the belief that bull and bullocks over the age of 16 tend to become economically unbeneficial. However, the court held that “The economy of the State of Gujarat is still predominantly agricultural. In the agricultural sector, the use of animals for milch, draught, breeding, or agricultural purposes has great importance. It has, therefore, become necessary to emphasize the preservation and protection of agricultural animals like bulls and bullocks. With the growing adoption of non-conventional energy sources like biogas plants, even the waste material has come to assume considerable value. After the cattle cease to breed or are too old to do work, they still continue to give dung for fuel, manure, and biogas, and therefore, they cannot be said to be useless. The backbone of Indian agriculture is the cow and her progeny in a way. The whole structure of Indian agriculture and its economic system is indirectly dependent on the cow.

In order to give effect to the policy of the State towards securing the principles laid down in Articles 47, 48 and clauses (b) and (c) of Article 39 of the Constitution, it was considered necessary also to impose a total prohibition against the slaughter of progeny of cow.”

The court also repelled all arguments on the grounds of fundamental rights under Article 14 and 19(1) (g) by stating that, “In the light of the material available in abundance before us, there is no escape from the conclusion that the protection conferred by the impugned enactment on cow progeny is needed in the interest of the nation’s economy. Merely because it may cause “inconvenience” or some “dislocation” to the butchers, restriction imposed by the impugned enactment does not cease to be in the interest of the general public. The former must yield to the latter.”

CONCLUSION

While the instant Bill introduced might have garnered controversy, it cannot be denied in light of the provisions of the Constitution and the Apex court’s rulings that imposing a ban as to the slaughter of cattle is in consonance with the Constitution, however, to what extent such ban on slaughter can be imposed still remains a debatable area.

[Author Kairvi Shashi is a 3rd-year BALLB student of Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies(GGSIPU), New Delhi].

1] 1958 AIR 731.

[2] (2005) 8 SCC 534.

References:

https://blog.ipleaders.in/whether-ban-cow-slaughter-constitutionally-valid/

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/new-bill-seeks-to-ban-slaughter-of-all-cattle-has-stringent-penal-provisions/article33292885.ece

https://www.thequint.com/news/india/explained-why-karnatakas-anti-cow-slaughter-bill-is-problematic

https://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/karnataka-anti-cow-slaughter-bill-what-is-it-and-why-has-it-triggered-a-controversy/2150541/