Disposed

Arshid K.L. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC17 Oct 2022WP(C)/27597/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL challenged a planned bull race (Maramadi) in Kollam. The High Court noted the District Collector had already prohibited the event citing Supreme Court rulings banning animal cruelty in such activities. The Court discharged the event since its scheduled date had passed and directed respondents to implement the prohibition order.

What did the court decide?

Interim order dated 26.08.2022 made absolute; writ petition disposed of; directed respondents to implement District Collector’s order prohibiting bull race.

Arshid K.L. Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR &

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY MONDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 25TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 27597 OF 2022

¶3

PETITIONERS:

¶4

ARSHID K.L.
KUNNUMPURATH HOUSE, PALLICKALP.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,695 604

¶5

BY ADVS.
L.RAM MOHAN
M.AUBREY ABRAHAM ISAAC

¶6

RESPONDENTS:

¶7

1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE(ANIMAL PROTECTION-F) DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,695001

¶8

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

¶9

CIVIL STATION ROAD,KOLLAM,PIN 691013

¶10

3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT,691574

¶11

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE LINK ROAD,KOLLAM-691001

¶12

5 THE SECRETARY

¶13

ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD OF INDIA,
C/O. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ANIMAL WELFARE
CAMPUS,P.O, 42KSTONE,DELHI-AGRA HIGHWAY,
NH-2, VILLAGE-SEEKRIBALLABHAGARH,
FARIDABAD,HARYANA-121004

¶14

6 CATTLE WELFARE ASSOCIATION REG.NO.Q-356/10, OYOOR P.O.,KOLLAM,691510, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶15

BY ADVS.
SRI. V. TEKCHAND, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
B N HASKAR B N
B.K.GOPALAKRISHNAN(K/37/1994)-R6
SMT.M.U. VIJAYALAKSHMI -R5

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶18

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

Dated this the 17^th day of October, 2022

¶21

S. Manikumar, CJ.

¶22

Considering the averments, prayers sought for and taking note of the Central Government notification dated 11.07.2011, decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Animal Welfare Board India v. Nagaraja reported in (2014) 7 SCC 547, decision of this court in Cattle Race Club of India, Palakkadu & others v. State of Kerala & others reported in 2015 (3) KHC 114 , and also Exhibit P2 circular dated 17.01.2015 issued by Agriculture (Animal Protection-F) Department, Kerala Government, on 26.08.2022, we passed the following orders:

¶23

“Instant public interest litigation is filed for the following reliefs:

¶24

“a) Issue a wit of mandamus/direction or order directing the respondents 2 to 4 to restrict the 6^th respondent or their men from Conducting Kalapoottu/Kannupoottu/Maramadi/or any such activities in the light of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court judgments reported in [(2014) 7 SCC 547] & Cattle Race Club of India, Palakkadu and Others v. State of Kerala & others [2015 (3) KHC 114] and Exhibits P2, P3 and P8 also.

¶25

b) Declare that Kalapoottu/Kannupoottu/Maramadi/or any such activities by the 6^th respondent is illegal and would

¶26

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶27

¶28

amount to cruelty against animals.

¶29

c) Issue a writ of mandamus/direction or order directing the respondents 2 to 4 take immediate action on Exhibits P5, P6 and P7 complaints forthwith”

¶30

Averments in support of the prayers are reproduced:

¶31

2.1 It is further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme court banned the Jallikkkatu or Bullock cartrace by upholding the Central Government notification dated 11/07/11 in Animal Welfare Board India V /s Nagaraja reported in 2014 (7) SCC547 . This court in Cattle Race Club of India, Palakkadu & others V/s State of Kerala & others reported in 2015 (3) KHC 114 reiterated the same. The State of Kerala represented by the Principal Secretary, Agricultural (Animal Protection-F) Department/1^st respondent also issued circular on this issue based on the apex court judgment.

¶32

2.2. It is also pertinent to note that the Cattle Welfare Association, Kollam/6^th respondent is not registered with the Animal Welfare Board of India/5^th respondent and nothing but a letter head organization which has got no right to conduct any such activities exhibiting the bull as a performing animal. 6^th respondent has not obtained any prior permission from the District Collector, Kollam/2^nd respondent also. Now the 6^th respondent issued a notice in their letter head stating that Maramdimalsaram is going to be conducted on 28/8/22.

¶33

2.3. On getting information about the same petitioner along with people having similar interest submitted a complaint before the 2^nd respondent. But no action has been taken to prevent the illegal activity and in complying the apex court judgment.

¶34

Reliance is placed on the circular Exhibit P2 dated

¶35

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶36

¶37

17.1.2015, which is reproduced:

¶38

“KERALA GOVERNMENT

¶39

Agriculture (Animal Protection-F) Department

¶40

5460 AHF-2 2/13AD Thiruvananthapuram, Date 17-1-15

¶41

CIRCULAR

¶42

Subject:- Agriculture (Animal Protection-F) Department – Related to Prevention of cruelty against animals.

¶43

Government have received complaints regarding the conduction of bull race/Kannupoottu Maramadi/ploughing competitions in violation of Prevention of cruelties to Animal's Act 1960 and notification dated 11/7/2011 GSR 528(E) issued by the Central Environmental and Forest Department.

¶44

As per the aforesaid notification the exhibition or trained as performing animals of the following animals bears, monkeys, tigers, panthers, lions and bull are illegal. Moreover, Jallikkattu or Bullock cart race are banned in Animal welfare board India v. Nagaraja in SLP Civil No.11686/2007.

¶45

Moreover by virtue of aforementioned law and Supreme Court judgment unnecessary causing pain and hardship to animals are punishable.

¶46

Under such circumstances causing unnecessary pain and hardship to the animals in violation of notification dated 11.7.2011 GSR 528(E) issued by the Central Enviornmental and as per the aforesaid law shall be prevented and on coming notice of such things the officers concerned shall take action as per law.

¶47

Subratho Bisawas Principle Secretary”

¶48

Attention of this Court is also invited to Exhibit P3 notification dated 7.1.2016 issued by the Special Secretary, Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate to contend that only bullock cart race was permitted by the said notification and not bull race. Notification dated 7.1.2016 is reproduced:

¶49

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶50

¶51

“MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE

¶52

NOTIFICATION

¶53

NEW DELHI, the 7^th January, 2016

¶54

G.S.R.13(E) – In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 22 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (59 of 1960), and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Environment and Forest, Government of India number G.S.R.528(E), dated the 11^th July, 2011 except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Government, hereby specifies that the following animals shall not be exhibited or trained as performing animals, with effect from the date of publication of this notification, namely:-

¶55

Bears

¶56

Monkeys

¶57

Tigers

¶58

Panthers

¶59

Lions

¶60

Bulls

¶61

Provided that bulls may be continue to be exhibited or trained as a performing animal, at events such as Jallikattu in Tamil Nadu and bullock cart races in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Punjab, Haryana, Kerala and Gujarat in the manner by the customs of any community or practiced traditionally under the customs or as a part of culture, in any part of the country subject to the following conditions, namely:-

¶62

(i) such event shall take place in any District where it is being traditionally held annually, at such place explicitly permitted by the District Collector or the District Magistrate;

¶63

(ii) bullock cart race shall be organised on a proper track, which shall not exceed two kilometers. In case of Jallikattu, the moment the bull leaves the enclosure, it shall be tamed within a radial distance of 15 metre;

¶64

(iii) ensure that the bulls are put to proper testing by the authorities of the Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Department to ensure that they are in good physical condition to participate in the event ad performance enhancement drugs are not administered to the bulls in any form; and

¶65

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶66

¶67

(iv) ensure that the rights conferred upon the animals under Section 3 and clause (a) and clause (m) of sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (59 of 1960) and five freedoms declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 7^th May, 2014 in Civil Appeal No.5387 of 2014 are fully protected during such events;

¶68

Provided further that any event of Jallikattu or bullock cart races so organised shall be held with the prior approval of the District Authorities concerned;

¶69

Provided also further that the Jallikattu or bullock cart races so organised shall be duly monitored by the District Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and State Animal Welfare Board or the District Authorities as the case may be, ensuring that no unnecessary pain or suffering is inflicted or caused, in any manner, whatsoever, during the course of such events, or in preparation thereof.

¶70

HEM PANDE, Special Secy.”

¶71

Attention of this Court is also invited to Exhibit P4 notice issued by the Cattle Welfare Association, Kollam represented by its Secretary/respondent No.6, requesting the bull owners to attend the competition on 28.8.2022 Sunday, at 9 a.m. for bull race.

¶72

Attention of this Court is also invited to Exhibit P5, a complaint given to the District Collector, Kollam against the conduct of the competition in violation of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Court.

¶73

Exhibit P6 is a similar complaint addressed to the Station House Officer, Parippally Police Station, Kollam/respondent No.3 and Exhibit P7 is the complaint given to the Superintendent of Police, Kollam, respondent No.4.

¶74

That apart, attention of this Court is also invited to decision of this Court in Cattle Race Club of India, Palakkad and Others v. State of Kerala and Others [2015 (3) KHC 114] ,

¶75

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶76

¶77

where in at paragraph 14, it is held thus:

¶78

“14. The conclusions made by the Court, with the declaration and directions are discernible from 'paragraph 77' of the decision in Animal Welfare Board of India vs. Nagaraja [2014 (2) KLT 717 (SC)] are as given below:

¶79

"77. we, therefore hold that , AWBI is right in its stand that Jallikattu, Bullock-cart race and such events per se violate S.3, 11(1)(a) and 11(1)(m) (ii) of PCA Act and hence we uphold the notification dated 11.7.2011 issued by the central government, consequently, bulls cannot be used as performing animals either for the , Jallikattu events or Bullock-Cart races in the state of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or elsewhere in the country. we, therefore make the following declarations and directions:

¶80

(1) We declare that the rights guaranteed to the bulls under S.3 and 11 of PCA Act read with Articles 51a(g) & (h) are cannot be taken away or curtailed, except under S.11(3) and 28 of PCA Act.

¶81

(2) We declare that the five freedoms, referred to earlier be read into S.3 and 11 of PCA Act, be protected and safeguarded by the States, Central Government, Union Territories , MoEF and AWBI.

¶82

(3) AWBI and Governments are directed to take appropriate steps to see that the persons in charge or care of animals, take reasonable measures to ensure the well being of animals.

¶83

(4) AWBI and Governments are directed to take steps to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on the animals since their rights have been statutorily protected under S.3 and 11 of PCA Act.

¶84

(5) AWBI is also directed to ensure that the provisions of S.11(1)(m)(ii) scrupulously followed , meaning thereby that the person in charge or care of the animal shall not incite any animal to fight against a human being or another animal.

¶85

(6) AWBI and Governments would also see that even in cases where S.11(3) is involved the animals, be not put to unnecessary pain and suffering and adequate and scientific methods be adopted to achieve the same.

¶86

(7) AWBI and Governments should take steps to

¶87

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶88

¶89

impart education in relation to human treatment of animals in accordance with S9(k) inculcating the spirit of Articles 51a(g) & (h) of the Constitution.

¶90

(8) Parliament is expected to make proper amendment of the PAC Act to provide an effective deterrent to achieve the object and purpose of the Act and for violation of S.11, adequate penalties and punishments should be imposed.

¶91

(9) parliament, it is expected would elevate rights, of animals to that of constitutional rights, as done by many of the countries around the world so as to protect their dignity and honour.

¶92

(10) the governments would see that if the provisions of the PAC Act and the declarations and the directions issued by this court are not properly and effectively complied with, disciplinary action be taken against the erring officials so that the purpose and object of PAC Act could be achieved.

¶93

(11) TNRJ Act is found repugnant to PAC Act, which is a welfare legislation, hence held constitutionally void being violative of Article 254(1) of the Constitution of India.

¶94

(12) AWBI is directed to take effective and speedy steps to implement the provisions of PAC Act in consultation with SPCA and make periodical reports to the governments and if any violation is noticed, the governments should take steps to remedy the same including appropriate follow up action ."

¶95

When the matter came up for admission, having gone through the averments and the material documents stated supra, and also of the fact that the competitions are scheduled on 28.8.2022 Sunday at 9 a.m. and subsequent dates, we directed the learned Senior Government Pleader, who took notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 to get instructions from the concerned respondents to whom representation have been submitted.

¶96

Reverting, Mr. V. Tekchand, learned Senior Government Pleader, submitted that taking note of the decisions

¶97

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶98

¶99

of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, High Court, and circulars stated supra, the District Collector, Kollam, respondent No.2 has issued proceedings No.DCKLM/9832/ 2022-M3 dated 26.8.2022, prohibiting bull race as well as bull race competition and directed all the responsible authorities to ensure that the order of the District Collector is implemented without fail.”

¶100

Translated version of the document is reproduced:

¶101

Proceedings of the District Collector & District Magistrate, Kollam

¶102

(Present Afsana Perween I.A.S)

¶103

DCKLM/9832/2022-M3

¶104

Dated 26-08-2022

¶105

Subject: Animal Protection-Stringent implementation of prohibition regarding amusement activities involving cruelty to animals such as Kaala Poottu (Bull Race) etc. within the District Reg.

¶106

Reference: 1. Orders of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in C.A. No .5387/2014 & SLP Civil No. 11686/2007.

¶107

Order dated 14/11/2014 of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WPC 25231/2014.

¶108

Circular No.5460 AHF 2/13 AD of Animal Husbandry Department (F).

¶109

Letter dated 11/08/2022 of Member of Kerala State Animal Welfare Board.

¶110

As per the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court of Kerala cited as Reference (1) & (2), cruelty to animals, Kalapoottu (Bull-cart races), Maramadi (one kind of cattle race) are absolutely prohibited. With respect to implementation of aforementioned judgments, State Government has issued a Circular cited as Reference (3).

¶111

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶112

¶113

A petition cited as Reference (4) has been received in this Office for prohibiting the Maramadi Mahotsav illegally organized to conduct at Chirakkara Village, Kollam District on 28-08-2002 while the prohibitory orders of the Hon'ble Courts are still in force.

¶114

Aforementioned judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court of Kerala and the directions issued by the Government shall be implemented strictly. In said circumstances, as per Ss. 3 & 11 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 and in the lights of the aforementioned judgments, the Authorities Concerned shall take imminent actions for the strict implementation of prohibition regarding the all kind of races using bulls and buffaloes ie. Kalapoottu (Bull-cart races), Kannupoottu (one kind of cattle race) and Maramadi (one kind of cattle race) within the Kollam District also and actions shall be taken against the violators of the law as per Rules.

¶115

AFSANA PERWEEN IAS

¶116

District Collector & District Magistrate, Kollam”

¶117

Having regard to the fact that the District Collector, Kollam has already issued direction to prohibit the said event, we only observe that the said order should be implemented in letter and spirit by respondent 2 to 4 and and all other authorities.

¶118

Ms. M.U. Vijayalakshmi takes notice on behalf of the Secretary, Animal Welfare Board of India, respondent No.5. Issue notice to Cattle Welfare Association, respondent No.6, returnable after three weeks.

¶119

Mr. V. Tekchand, learned Senior Government Pleader is directed to communicate the orders of this Court forthwith to the District Collector, Kollam/respondent No.2, the Station House

¶120

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶121

¶122

Officer, Parippally Police Station/ respondent No.3 and the Superintendent of Police Kollam/respondent No.4, for effective implementation of the above order.

¶123

Post the matter on 26.9.2022.”

¶124

Firstly, though Mr. B.K. Gopalakrishnan, learned counsel for the Cattle Welfare Association, respondent No.6, sought time to file counter affidavit, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to accept the said request, as the date scheduled for the event ie., 28.08.2022, is already over.

¶125

Secondly, though learned counsel for the Cattle Welfare Association, respondent No.6, further submitted that there is no cruelty to the animals as contended, we are not inclined to delve into the said contention, for the reason that the event, “Maramadi Mahotsavam” scheduled and published, is not permitted by the Government of India or the State of Kerala. In the above circumstances, there is no need to grant any time for filing counter affidavit.

¶126

As stated supra, District Collector, Kollam, respondent No.2, has already issued directions prohibiting the said event, which we have taken note of.

¶127

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶128

¶129

In the light of the above, interim order dated 26.08.2022 is made absolute. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶130

Sd/S. Manikumar, Chief Justice

¶131

Sd/Shaji P. Chaly, Judge

¶132

sou.xxxx

¶133

W.P(C).27597/2022

¶134

¶135

APPENDIX

¶136

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS

¶137

EXHIBIT P1	-	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P2	-	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 17.1.2015 ALONG WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P3	-	TRUE COPY OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION DATED 7.1.2016
EXHIBIT P4	-	TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 28.7.22 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P5	-	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 2^NDRESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P5(a)	-	TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 17.8.2022 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P6	-	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 3^RDRESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P6(a)	-	TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 19.8.2022 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P7	-	TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 4^THRESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P7(a)	-	TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 19.8.2022 ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
EXHIBIT P8	-	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.8.2022 IN WP 21681/22

Arshid K.L. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshid K.L. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Eldhose Saju Vs Union of India

M/S. Aster D M Healthcare Limited Vs the Additional Director General of Police

K.K.Shailaja Vs Union of India

P.v.Balakrishnan Vs District Collector

State of Kerala Vs M.M. Hussain

Bala Ravanan Vs the Kerala Lok Ayukta