Orders reserved Sekarreporter 1: https://youtu.be/Us1uMvwBEC4 [12/8, 14:12] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:40] Rajalashmi Admk: ஜல்லிகட்டு வழக்கில் மான்புமிகு முன்னாள் முதல்வர் ஜல்லிகட்டு நாயகன் திரு. ஓ.பன்னீர்செல்வம் மற்றும் அவரது மகன் அவர்கள் சார்பாக உச்சநீதிமன்றத்தில் ஜல்லிகட்டுக்கு ஆதரவாக எடுத்து வைக்கப்பட்ட வாதங்கள் [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: 👍👍 [12/8, 12:57] Sekarreporter 1: Brief Note of Submissions on behalf of Thiru O.Panneerselvam and Thiru P. Ravindranath in the Supreme Court Batch of Cases relating to Jallikattu
[12/8, 14:11] Sekarreporter 1: https://youtu.be/Us1uMvwBEC4
[12/8, 14:12] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: [12/8, 12:40] Rajalashmi Admk: ஜல்லிகட்டு வழக்கில் மான்புமிகு முன்னாள் முதல்வர் ஜல்லிகட்டு நாயகன் திரு. ஓ.பன்னீர்செல்வம் மற்றும் அவரது மகன் அவர்கள் சார்பாக உச்சநீதிமன்றத்தில் ஜல்லிகட்டுக்கு ஆதரவாக எடுத்து வைக்கப்பட்ட வாதங்கள்
[12/8, 12:56] Sekarreporter 1: 👍👍
[12/8, 12:57] Sekarreporter 1: Brief Note of Submissions on behalf of Thiru O.Panneerselvam and Thiru P. Ravindranath in the Supreme Court Batch of Cases relating to Jallikattu
• The challenge to the legal validity Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 2017 that permits Jallikattu with sufficient regulations and safeguards, must fail because:
o The fundamental rights to equality, life and personal liberty under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution are granted only to human beings or those entities that have specifically conferred the status of “person” by law (such as companies). Animals have not been conferred legal personality under Indian law, and hence they are not entitled to claim the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21.
o In other countries, such as New Zealand, where laws have been enacted to grant legal personality to elements of nature (such as rivers), there are detailed statutes which clearly describe what the grant of such personality means and the legal effects that it will have. This is also the approach under Indian laws like the Companies Act which have detailed provisions explaining what the grant of legal personality to companies entails. In the absence of such a detailed law conferring legal personality to animals, the same ought not be conferred by the court.
o The Tamil Nadu amendment to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (the “PCA Act”) is in consonance with the original objects of the PCA Act. The PCA Act always incorporated an exception under Section 28 to permit even the killing of animals in any manner (irrespective of whether such manner of killing causes unnecessary pain and suffering or not) where such manner of killing is required by the religion of community. The Tamil Nadu Amendment only extends the same logic to cultural grounds (from religious grounds). Moreover, the Tamil Nadu Amendment read with the Regulations issued thereunder take all necessary measures to ensure that the bulls are not cruelly treated in any manner. Thus, the Tamil Nadu Amendment does not contradict the fundamental duties to act with humanism and compassion or the original objects and provisions of the PCA Act.
o The Tamil Nadu Amendment is validly enacted under Entry 17 of the Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. The required presidential assent had been taken. Hence the law correctly enacted as the procedure prescribed in the constitution.
o The Tamil Nadu Amendment saves the practice of jallikattu which has a direct nexus with the improving the breeds of bullock in Tamil Nadu, for at least two reasons: (i) firstly, the immense popularity of the cultural practice incentivizes farmers to rear native breeds; (ii) secondly, the winning bull in such events will clearly be stronger and more virile – such winning bull is then used a breeding bull with the effect of improving the genetic stock of the native breed. Therefore, the Tamil Nadu Amendment also furthers the Directive Principles of State Policy under Article 48 of the Constitution of India.
