101st Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra1929901046878376 Tamil Nadu102721583781385 Delhi92175630072864 Gujarat34686249411905 Uttar Pradesh2579717597749 West Bengal2048813571717 Karnataka197108807293 Rajasthan1878515043435 Telangana185709069275 Andhra Pradesh169347632206 Haryana1550911019251 Madhya Pradesh1410610815589 Bihar10911821184 Assam8956583212 Jammu and Kashmir76954856105 Odisha7316535333 Punjab56683989149 Kerala4594243626 Uttarakhand2791190937 Chhatisgarh2339193713 Jharkhand2339160512 Tripura140110931 Manipur13166390 Goa11984783 Himachal Pradesh9796179 Puducherry73930112 Nagaland5351820 Chandigarh4463676 Arunachal Pradesh182601 Mizoram1601230 Sikkim101520 Meghalaya50421
Nation Current Affairs 09 Nov 2016 Can't have glad ...

Can't have gladiator type sport in India: SC on Jallikattu

Published Nov 9, 2016, 8:03 pm IST
Updated Nov 9, 2016, 8:38 pm IST
One can use computer for indulging in bull fighting, why tame bulls for it, the bench said.
Bull-taming sport, Jallikattu (Photo: PTI)
 Bull-taming sport, Jallikattu (Photo: PTI)

New Delhi: Questioning the Centre for its notification allowing use of bulls in events like Jallikattu, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said India cannot "import Roman gladiator type sport".

A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and R F Nariman said that animals may not have rights but humans cannot negate their obligation enshrined under the Constitution. "We cannot import Roman Gladiator type sport here. One can use computer for indulging in bull fighting. Why tame bulls for it," the bench said.


It told Additional Solicitor General P S Narasimha, appearing for Centre, that the government cannot remove the very basis of the apex court's May 7, 2014 judgement by making a notification.

"How does the bull get tamed for entertainment? Can the bulls be contemplated for entertainment of human mind? Bulls are supposed to rest, why should they race," the bench observed while hearing a batch of pleas filed by some NGO's challenging the January 8 notification of the Centre.

The bench said, "Jallikattu sport itself is cruelty on animals. There is prohibition of cruelty. We have to show compassion to the animals. It is our constitutional obligation."

Narasimha contended that the government was empowered under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 to enlist animals to be used as performing ones.

Senior advocate Shekhar Naphade, appearing for Tamil Nadu, said when humans can run for marathon, why can bulls not be made to do so.

To this, the bench said "humans have a free will, but bulls are forced into it". It posted the matter for further hearing on November 26.

Jallikattu, also known Eruthazhuvuthal, is a bull-taming sport played in Tamil Nadu as a part of the Pongal harvest festival.

The court in its 2014 judgement had said that bulls cannot be used as performing animals, either for Jallikattu events or bullock-cart races in the states of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or elsewhere in the country, and had banned their use across the country.

The apex court had also earlier declared Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009 as constitutionally void, being violative or Article 254(1) of the Constitution.

On January 8, the Centre had issued a notification lifting ban on Jallikattu in poll-bound Tamil Nadu with certain restrictions, which was challenged in the apex court by Animal Welfare Board of India, People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India, a Bangalore-based NGO and others.

On July 26, the apex court had said that just because the bull-taming sport of Jallikattu was a centuries-old tradition, it cannot be justified.

The apex court had said if the parties are able to convince the court that its earlier judgement was wrong, it may refer the matter to a larger bench.

The Supreme Court had on January 21 refused to re-examine its 2014 judgement banning use of bulls for Jallikattu events or bullock-cart races across the country. The apex court had earlier stayed January 8 notification.

Location: India, Delhi, New Delhi