Jallikattu and Animals Rights in India
🐂 JALLIKATTU AND ANIMAL RIGHTS IN INDIA
🔹 What is Jallikattu?
Jallikattu is a traditional sport practiced in Tamil Nadu, especially during the Pongal festival, where a bull is released into a crowd and participants try to embrace or tame it.
It is considered a symbol of Tamil culture and pride.
However, it has also raised serious concerns regarding animal cruelty, safety of participants, and constitutional validity.
⚖️ Legal and Constitutional Framework
1. Article 48 of the Constitution
A Directive Principle of State Policy that directs the State to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern lines and prohibit animal cruelty.
2. Article 51A(g) – Fundamental Duty
It is the duty of every citizen to have compassion for living creatures.
3. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act)
Primary law for protection of animals in India.
Section 3: Imposes duty on persons having charge of animals to take care of them.
Section 11: Defines what amounts to cruelty to animals, including unnecessary suffering or pain.
🔴 Legal Controversy: Jallikattu vs Animal Rights
Core Issue:
Does Jallikattu violate animal rights and laws against cruelty?
Or does it represent a cultural tradition protected under the Constitution?
🧑⚖️ Key Case Law:**
✅ Animal Welfare Board of India vs. A. Nagaraja (2014)
Citation: (2014) 7 SCC 547
Facts:
The Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) challenged the practice of Jallikattu, citing cruelty to bulls.
Judgment:
Supreme Court banned Jallikattu, holding it as cruel and violative of Section 3 and 11 of the PCA Act.
Bulls are not performing animals by nature.
The Court held that tradition cannot justify cruelty.
Recognized animals have a right to dignity and protection from unnecessary pain.
Key Observations:
"Article 21 is not just for humans, but animal welfare must also be considered under constitutional morality."
Introduced the idea of animal rights jurisprudence in India.
🔄 Aftermath: The Tamil Nadu Amendment (2017)
Following public protests and demand to protect tradition, the Tamil Nadu government passed an amendment to the PCA Act, allowing Jallikattu by defining it as a cultural tradition, not cruelty.
⚖️ Legal Challenge:**
The amendment was challenged in the Supreme Court on the grounds that:
It bypasses the 2014 judgment.
It violates fundamental rights of animals under the PCA Act and the Constitution.
🏛️ Current Status (as of recent updates):
The matter was referred to a 5-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court to decide:
Whether state legislation allowing Jallikattu is constitutionally valid.
Whether animal rights can be interpreted under Article 21.
The final verdict (expected or possibly delivered depending on current date) would clarify the constitutional balance between tradition and animal rights.
⚖️ Other Relevant Cases:
1. Gauri Maulekhi vs. Union of India (2017)
Related to animal transport and sacrifice.
Reiterated that animal welfare is a constitutional obligation.
2. State of Gujarat vs. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat (2005)
Though related to cattle slaughter, the Supreme Court held that animal preservation is a constitutional value, emphasizing economic and cultural roles of animals.
🧭 Conflict of Values
| Traditional Rights (Jallikattu) | Animal Rights |
|---|---|
| Cultural heritage and identity | Right to be free from cruelty (PCA Act) |
| Right to practice culture (Art. 29) | Article 51A(g): Duty to show compassion |
| State laws protecting traditions | Article 21 interpreted to include animal dignity |
| Public celebration and sport | Proven suffering and harm to animals |
🎯 Key Legal Questions:
Can culture override animal protection laws?
Is Jallikattu inherently cruel, or can it be regulated safely?
Do animals have constitutional rights?
Can the State legitimize a banned practice through an amendment?
✅ Summary:
Jallikattu is at the intersection of cultural rights and animal welfare.
The Supreme Court’s 2014 Nagaraja judgment declared it cruel and illegal under the PCA Act.
The Tamil Nadu amendment tried to revive it by declaring it a cultural practice.
The case raises deeper issues about how the Indian Constitution balances tradition and compassion.
A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court is deciding the matter to determine whether the State can override animal rights for the sake of tradition.
🏁 Conclusion
The Jallikattu issue presents a classic constitutional dilemma:
Can tradition justify cruelty?
Can the state protect animals while respecting cultural practices?
While animal welfare laws prohibit cruelty, Jallikattu supporters argue cultural identity must be preserved. The courts have to carefully navigate between these competing constitutional values.
RELATED Blog
0 comments