Kochi: The Kerala High Court on Wednesday declined to stay the operation of the provisions in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Regulations of Livestock Markets) Rules 2017 notified by the Centre banning the sale of cattle for slaughter in animal markets.
The court observed that there was force in the contention of the petitioners that the rule, which prohibits the sale of cattle for slaughter in cattle markets and bans the purchase of cattle from cattle markets for slaughter, was beyond the scope of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act which neither deals with the livestock nor with the regulation of the activities in the markets.
The court, while admitting the petitions, directed the Centre and other respondents to file an affidavit and posted the petitions for final hearing on June 28.
The court observed that the Supreme Court had held that it was only when there was a clear violation of a Constitutional provision beyond reasonable doubt that the court should declare it to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court had also held that the legislation should not normally be put under suspension merely because a statute comes up for examination and some arguable point is raised. Therefore, the court was not inclined to put on hold the impugned rule pending consideration of the matter though it finds strong prima facie case for the petitioners.
The petition was filed by Kozhikode Meat Workers’ Association and meat traders. According to the petitioners, 90 per cent of the cattle for slaughter was sourced from animal markets and, therefore, the rules were in effect a ban on slaughter of cattle and infringes the fundamental rights guaranteed under 19(1)(g) of the Constitution (freedom to carry on any trade or business) to thousands of people who are involved in the trade of cattle and meat.
The ban would also make the agricultural activities unprofitable as the farmers are not able to generate any income by the sale of cattle for slaughter, which could not be used for agricultural activities. It was also pointed out that since meat is one of the main food articles in the state, the impugned rule would result in scarcity of meat.
