‘Animal Sacrifice an Essential Religious Practice’, Analysing the Plea in Supreme Court Against the Judgment of Kerala High Court

Must Read

Explained: The Right to be Forgotten in India

Right to Privacy is an essential fundamental right which has been enshrined in the Indian Constitution under Article 21...

How will the New WhatsApp Privacy Policy Affect Us?

On January 4, 2020, the California based tech giant WhatsApp announced its new privacy law. It allows data integration...

India’s International ‘Retrospective Taxation’ Regime Vis-a-Vis PCA Rulings in Vodafone and Cairn in 2020

The imposition of retrospective taxation of foreign companies doing business in India has been at the helm of controversy...

What is the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) is an Act of the Parliament. It seeks to protect...

Should the Exorbitant Amounts Charged for RT-PCR Tests be Refunded?

Introduction A plea has been filed in the Honourable Supreme Court of India seeking a refund of exorbitant amounts charged...

Should CCTV’s be Installed in the Police Station?

Introduction In a recent judgment, the bench led by Justice Nariman issued directions to both the state and Union Territory...

Follow us

An appeal had been filed in the Supreme Court against the judgment of Kerala High Court. This judgment upheld the Constitutionality of the Kerala Animals and Birds Sacrifices Act, 1968.

The petitioners contended that animal sacrifice is an integral part of their religion. He also contended that the judgment was against his right under Article 25(1) of the Constitution.

Animal Sacrifice in India

The practise of animal sacrifice is a worldwide phenomenon. Countless faiths practise it for different reasons. Mostly, devotees perform them to please the deity.

In India, people sacrifice animals during festivals and fairs. These practices can be traced back to the period of Vedas and Upanishads. Some superstitious beliefs deep-rooted in our society form their basis. The most important question that emerges is:

Can we allow cruelty towards animals in the name of religion?

What does the Law in our Country say?

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, is the primary legislation in India regarding animal cruelty. It governs and regulates such practices in India. Its objective is to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain on animals.

However, some of the States have their legislation to deal with such practices. In the State of Kerala, we have the Kerala Animals and Birds Sacrifices Act, 1968. The Act bans sacrificing animals for appeasing deities.

Present Case

On June 16, 2020, the Kerala HC dismissed a plea on animal sacrifice. It upheld the Constitutionality of the Kerala Animals and Birds Sacrifices Act, 1968. Two persons, Muraleedharan T. and Vimal CV, challenged the provisions of the Act. The bench comprised Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly. They made the following observation:

There are no materials to show which community of Hindus can sacrifice animals.

Contentions of the Petitioners

The petitioners had raised three grounds to allow the sacrificing of animals. They contended that the ban on such practices is:

  • Unreasonable interference with their fundamental rights. Specifically, Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
  • Violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
  • Void because of Article 254 of the Constitution.

The petitioners also contended that the Act was in arbitrary. The Act allows the killing of animals for personal consumption but not as a sacrifice to the deity. Hence, they contented it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act is Central legislation. Section 28 of the said Act does not make a sacrifice of animals an offence. However, the impugned Act criminalizes this practice. Thus, they pointed out that it negates the former provision. Hence, the impugned Act is void in view of Article 254 of the Constitution.

The Court’s Observations

The Court observed that Article 25 and 26 only protect the essentials of the religion.

On the issue of Article 254, the Court observed that the objective of both the Acts is different. It further noted that Section 28 of the PCA Act is ‘killing’ and not ‘sacrificing’.

Taking all these into considerations, the Court dismissed the plea. However, the aggrieved petitioners had filed an appeal in the Supreme Court.

The stance of the Supreme Court over the years

The Supreme Court has varied its stances on this issue. There are cases where the SC has not entertained cases on animal sacrifice. In some cases, the SC has observed that sacrificing animals is an old age custom. However, in some instances, it has closed its eyes towards such cruelty against animals.

Over the years, the SC has taken cognizance of this matter. A contrary view has been in the case of N. Adithayan vs Travancore Devaswom Board & Ors. The SC observed that it could not protect customs that do not have any material as proof. There are no materials to show which community of Hindus is allowed to sacrifice animals. Hence, the Court cannot allow it.

Further, the SC made another observation in the case of Ramesh Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. The SC observed that Section 28 of the PCA Act, 1960, does not permit the sacrifice of animals. It allows the killing of animals in the manner required by the community but not sacrifice.

The Court is indeed bound to balance and maintain harmony among all faiths. Per contra, this does not allow people to use religion as a tool to commit cruelty against animals.

Awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is yet to decide the present case. Analyzing the observations of the SC on such cases, the Court will most likely dismiss the appeal.

Animal rights in India are still at an initial stage. At any time, faith, customs, etc. should not take precedence over the lawful rights of humans or animals. This practice of sacrificing animals to please the deity is superstitious. It is high time we recognize this and stop cruelty against animals.

Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Benefit of Probation Not Excluded by the Provisions of Mandatory Minimum Sentence Under Section 397 of Ipc

This case concerns the dispute regarding the granting of probation on good conduct to the accused under the age of twenty-one years.   Brief facts of...

Supreme Court Asks for the Centre’s Response on PIL Filed Seeking the Formation of a Media Tribunal

The Supreme Court sought responses from the Press Council of India (PCI), News Broadcasters Association (NBA) on a PIL which sought to set up a media tribunal to tackle issues concerning the media like complaints against media, channels, and networks. Media has become like an unruly horse that has to be tamed to express the plea.

Law Student Asked the Supreme Court To Take Suo Moto Cognizance of the Violent Farmer Protests

A law student of Mumbai University, Ashish Rai has asked the Supreme Court to take Suo Moto Cognizance of the insult to the national flag done by the farmer protests at the Red Fort. In the course of the farmer's tractor rally on Tuesday, some of the protesters unfurled their own flags by entering the premises of the Red Fort.

Farmers Meeting With the Supreme Court Committee Postponed To Jan 29 Due To the Traffic Restrictions

Due to the traffic restrictions after the violent protests broke out on Republic Day, the meeting of farmers with the Supreme Court Committee that was supposed to take place today was postponed to 29th January.

Supreme Court Stays Bombay HC Judgment which said Groping without Skin Contact Not Sexual Assault under POCSO

The National Commission for Women (NCW) has challenged the Bombay High Court judgment where it stated that groping a child’s breasts without any ‘skin-to-skin’ contact will not be considered as sexual assault as defined under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Supreme Court Classifying Employees Based on Educational Qualifications for Promotion or Appointment Is Neither Violative of Article 14 nor of Article 16

This case concerns the dispute relating to the classification of employees belonging to the homogenous group based on educational qualifications. Brief facts of the case The...

Supreme Court Refuses To Transfer Petitions To Itself Related To ‘Love Jihad’ Filed in Allahabad High Court

On Monday, the Supreme Court refused to entertain the plea which was filed by the UP Government regarding the transfer of all the pleas challenging the ordinance the court passed, from Allahabad High Court to the Supreme Court.

Bombay HC Nagpur Bench Holds That Groping a Girl Without ‘Skin To Skin’ Contact Is Not Sexual Assault

The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court acquitted a man charged under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and convicted him of a minor offence under IPC stating that there was no direct physical contact.

Delhi High Court Restrains Publication of Book on “the Ryan School Murder”

The Order had come in an injunction application filed by the St. Xavier's Education Trust in Delhi. The Plaintiff sought ad-interim restraining order on...

Supreme Court Closed Proceeding in Case of “in Re: Advocate on Record Includes a Proprietary Firm Etc.”

Brief facts of the case Emails from the Petitioner resulted in an administrative decision. An Order of the Supreme Court has drawn up the issue...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -