PIL filed in Supreme Court seeking ban on animal sacrifice during Eid-ul-Adha

September 8, 2016

New Delhi, Sep 8: A PIL has been filed in the Supreme Court questioning the sacrifice of animals on Eid-ul-Adha (Bakrid) and the validity of a provision of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, saying the practice was "cruel, inhuman, barbarian" and cannot be protected in the name of religion.

pilThe PIL, filed by seven Uttar Pradesh residents, has sought the court's direction to ensure that no animal is killed during the festival, called the feast of sacrifice, which is to be celebrated early next week.

"Issue a writ, order or direction or declaration to the effect that the practice of sacrifice of animals on Eid-ul-Adha day is unconstitutional and same cannot be resorted to by any member of the public," the petition said.

The plea, filed through lawyer Vishnu Shankar Jain, has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 28 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act which exempts the killings under religious practices and reads: "Nothing contained in this Act shall render it an offence to kill any animal in a manner required by the religion of any community."

"Issue a writ, order or direction striking down Section 28 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 as unconditional, being ultra vires to Article 14,21 and 25 of the Constitution," it said.

The PIL has made Ministries of Home Affairs, Law and Justice and Environment and Forest and Animal Welfare Board of India as parties.

"Tendency to sacrifice animals, even on roads and public places, are developing fast every year on Eid-ul-Adha in the most uncouth and inhuman manner and litres of blood is spread at public places affecting the sentiments of public at large," the plea said.

"It is most respectfully submitted that animals sacrifice on Eid-ul-Adha day is cruel, inhuman, barbarian, decency and morality and the same cannot be protected in the name of religion as such practice is in violation of Article 14,21 and 25 of the Constitution of India," it said.

Comments

naren kotian
 - 
Friday, 9 Sep 2016

they train how to slit the throat for their kids .. no wonder ISIS militrants love throat slitting and beheading ...they rejoice the kill ... it must be banned ...countries throat slitting activities are terrorism , rapes , smugling , hawala , robbing and thefts .. needless to say who are in large no ... hahaha ... so it is the effect of this ..makla justification nodri .. upper part na slice maadi pain agda haage koltaranthe ...adu dodda rocket science nanmaklige ...haha.. 150 crores iddu ondu nobel tegello yogyathe illa ...science bagge maatu .. hogree hogree fish sales madi hogi ... delivery time aithu :)

True indian
 - 
Friday, 9 Sep 2016

Halal best method.

Even yogesh also certified that halal is best way. In halal method. Animals and plants doesnt feel pain.

TRUE INDIAN
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

@yogesh

Well said, that's why we say that halal method either veg or animal, is the best method. because of the speed both doesn't feel pain at all.

at last u agree Halal is the best Method. When u accidentally cut ur finger, u wont

TRUE INDIAN
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

in halal method animals don't feel pain. what about fish, which die very painfully.

stop eating fish also. fish is also vishnu's avatar, which is more holier than cow.

muslims don't eat pig, because it is dirty and filthy, carries lots of diseases

hindus don't eat cow. why. is it dirty and filthy too.

TRUE INDIAN
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

in halal method, animals feel zero pain, proved by science. it is also proved that halal food is more tastier than non halal. and there is no blood in the meat in halal method, even science says halal is the best method. even non-muslims in western countries wants halal chicken, just check the restaurant in usa name is halal guys restaurant. people stand in queue, most of them are non-muslims. next to the restaurant there is one more restaurant, which is non-halal. which is fully empty

Do animals have rights?

The vegetarian argument is that killing animals for the benefit of humans is cruel and an infringement of their rights. They put both on the same level without conceding any superiority to humans over animals. This argument is seriously flawed, because if animals had rights comparable to those of humans, they must also have equivalent duties. In other words, we must be able to blame them and punish them if they violate the rights of others. It is absurd that it should be considered a crime for humans to kill a sheep, but natural for a lion to do so. The problem stems from a misconception of the role of human life within the animal kingdom: a denial of purposeful creation within a clearly defined hierarchy degrades humans to the level of any other creature. Yet even then, the argument is illogical: Why should plants, for example, be denied the same protection from a violation of the sanctity of their life?

Is Islamic slaughter cruel?

The question of how an animal should be slaughtered to avoid cruelty is a different one. It is true that when the blood flows from the throat of an animal it looks violent, but just because meat is now bought neatly and hygienically packaged on supermarket shelves does not mean the animal didn’t have to die? Non-Islamic slaughter methods dictate that the animal should be rendered unconscious before slaughter. This is usually achieved by stunning or electrocution. Is it less painful to shoot a bolt into a sheep’s brain or to ring a chicken’s neck than to slit its throat? To watch the procedure does not objectively tell us what the animal feels.

The scientific facts

A team at the university of Hannover in Germany examined these claims through the use of EEG and ECG records during slaughter. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all the animals used in the experiment and they were then allowed to recover for several weeks. Some of the animals were subsequently slaughtered the halal way by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides together with the trachea and esophagus but leaving the spinal cord intact. The remainder were stunned before slaughter using a captive bolt pistol method as is customary in Western slaughterhouses. The EEG and ECG recordings allowed to monitor the condition of the brain and heart throughout.

The Halal method

With the halal method of slaughter, there was not change in the EEG graph for the first three seconds after the incision was made, indicating that the animal did not feel any pain from the cut itself. This is not surprising. Often, if we cut ourselves with a sharp implement, we do not notice until some time later. The following three seconds were characterized by a condition of deep sleep-like unconsciousness brought about by the draining of large quantities of blood from the body. Thereafter the EEG recorded a zero reading, indicating no pain at all, yet at that time the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously as a reflex reaction of the spinal cord. It is this phase which is most unpleasant to onlookers who are falsely convinced that the animal suffers whilst its brain does actually no longer record any sensual messages.

The Western method

Using the Western method, the animals were apparently unconscious after stunning, and this method of dispatch would appear to be much more peaceful for the onlooker. However, the EEG readings indicated severe pain immediately after stunning. Whereas in the first example, the animal ceases to feel pain due to the brain starvation of blood and oxygen – a brain death, to put it in laymen’s terms – the second example first causes a stoppage of the heart whilst the animal still feels pain. However, there are no unsightly convulsions, which not only means that there is more blood retention in the meat, but also that this method lends itself much more conveniently to the efficiency demands of modern mass slaughter procedures. It is so much easier to dispatch an animal on the conveyor belt, if it does not move.

suresh
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

Yogesh, Lol, you explained halal veg in best way... anyone can understand now.. all doubts cleared.

Thousif
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

after sacrifice animal we are not throwing meat and not keeping meat to eat ghost. we share all the meat to poor people and our family.we are not wasting the meat. if you care that much about animal you should ban eating non veg (chicken mutton)

Rikaz
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

I am surprised to see why they dont file PIL from banning export of beef meat. Very strange. Why they are maintaining double standard.

Government can allow Indian cow meat for foreigners to eat....this is very bad and disgusting policy....

Zakir
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

On Eid day he feels \Cruel\" other days ?
What about vegetables right? even number of studies prove that plants feel pain. Can people stop using plant and vegetable ?

Court should have right to panish if some one file the IPL which does not make any sence and causing unnessary focus, contradict the constituional rights and waste of court time etc.,"

Ahmed
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

We Muslims sacrifice animals once in a year.But our Hindu brother's sacrifices animals every now and then in the name of Balidhan.We Muslims are not bothered about the PIL.Bec we blindly believe in Almighty Allah.

muthhu
 - 
Thursday, 8 Sep 2016

You have to file PIL against killing of HUmans first

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 8,2020

Mangaluru, Mar 8: A cruise ship with a Panama flag has been turned back at the New Mangalore Port here following the Centre's advisory in the wake of the coronavirus outbreak, officials said.

The vessel 'MSC Lirica' was sent back on Saturday as the Union Ministry of Shipping had directed all ports not to allow any cruise ship from foreign destinations to call on Indian ports.

No further details about the ship were disclosed.

New Mangaluru Port Trust chairman A V Ramana said the ministry has directed all ports to deny entry to cruise ships till March 31 in the wake of the coronavirus scare.

Around 25 vessels were expected to call on the port here during the cruise season.

Meanwhile, the National Disaster Response Force (NDRF) conducted an awareness programme on prevention of coronavirus COVID-19 at Mangaluru International Airport.

The stakeholders were sensitised on handling passengers affected with covid-19 and precautions to be taken for dealing with affected passengers.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 9,2020

Karwar, Feb 9: It has now come to the knowledge that a Karwar youth identified as Abhishek (26) who is on board a cruise ship that was turned away at a Japan port has reached out for help. The vessel was carrying coronavirus infected tourists onboard.

On Friday, Japan had reported 41 confirmed cases in the vessel which is currently docked at Daikoku Pier Cruise Terminal in Yokohama, Tokyo. Abhishek works as a steward in Diamond Princess ship owned by Carnival Corporation & plc. The reports say that he is not infected by the virus. Around 3,700 people have been confined aboard the ship. The total number of Indian nationals is not yet confirmed.

Abhishek who hails from Canara Bank colony in Karwar in Karnataka on Saturday morning through a video call appealed to the Indian government to evacuate him from the ship and deport to India, while the company, where he works, has said the Indian Embassy in Japan is in continuous contact with the concerned authorities in Japan

Abhishek in his call to parents said “I am scared of the ship as the people are quarantined and the ship is isolated. Please contact government officials to evacuate me from the ship and deport me to India.”

Father of Abhishek, Balakrishna B talking to ToI said the Karwar district administration and the company he is working with have asked not to panic. The deputy commissioner (DC) of Karwar said Japan is performing normal procedures to contain the spread of the deadly virus which killed over 600 people across the world.

Indian embassy in Japan in its statement mailed to the parent of Abhishek said “As you are aware that the Diamond Princess cruise ship is presently under quarantine for a period of 14 days from Feb 5 due to positively tested cases of coronavirus onboard. All passengers and crew members on board have to follow the health and safety regulations put in place by the Japanese ministry of health, labour and welfare”

The embassy official, Anil K Kalra further said the office is in constant touch with the Japanese authorities who have assured that all passengers and the crew members of the ship are being taken care of and kept under health monitoring and there is no cause to worry. The official said “we are trying to reach out to all Indian nationals onboard to know about their well being and assure all possible help at this difficult juncture.

DC of Karwar, Harish Kumar K urged the parents not to panic and his office has sent a letter to state the government that will be forwarded to the ministry of external affairs. Japan is doing standard operating procedures to contain the virus and as of now, Abhishek is secure and safe.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.