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
January 6,2020

Jan 6: A Thane resident lost a little over Rs 1 lakh in an online fraud involving popular payment gateways, police said on Saturday. The complainant, a resident of Patlipada, wanted to sell his furniture and posted an ad on Facebook on December 21, an official said.

On December 24, he received a call from one Rajendra Sharma who offered to buy the furniture and wanted to transfer the amount through payment gateways — Paytm and Google Pay, he said.

However, instead of the money getting credited to his account, the complainant found that Rs 1.01 lakh were debited from him during three transactions on two payment gateways, the official said.

The complainant realised that he had been cheated when the accused assured that he would return the money and asked him for another account number, he added.

An offense has been registered against the unidentified accused under section 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code and Information Technology Act and further investigations are underway, he 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.
News Network
May 27,2020

In a development which highlights the diversity in the United Kingdom’s legal system, a 40-year-old Muslim woman has become the first hijab-wearing judge in the country.

Raffia Arshad, a barrister, was appointed a deputy district judge on the Midlands circuit last week after 17-year career in law.  

She said her promotion was great news for diversity in the world’s most respected legal system. She hopes to be an inspiration to young Muslims.

Ms Arshad, who grew up in Yorkshire, north England, has wanted to work in law since she was 11.

Ms Arshad said the judicial office was looking to promote diversity, but when they appointed her they did not know that she wore the hijab.

‘It’s definitely bigger than me,” she told Metro newspaper. "I know this is not about me.

"It’s important for all women, not just Muslim women, but it is particularly important for Muslim women."

Ms Arshad, a mother of three, has been practising private law dealing with children, forced marriage, female genital mutilation and other cases involving Islamic law for the past 17 years.

She was the first in her family to go to university and has also written a leading text on Islamic family law.

Although the promotion by the Lord Chief Justice was welcome news for her, Ms Arshad said the happiness from other people sharing the news was “far greater”.

“I’ve had so many emails from people, men and women," she said.

"It’s the ones from women that stand out, saying that they wear a hijab and thought they wouldn’t even be able to become a barrister, let alone a judge."

Ms Arshad is regularly the subject of discrimination in the courtroom because of her choice to wear the hijab.

She is sometimes mistaken for a court worker or a client.

Ms Arshad said that recently she was asked by an usher whether she was a client, an interpreter, and even if she were on work experience.

“I have nothing against the usher who said that but it reflects that as a society, even for somebody who works in the courts, there is still this prejudicial view that professionals at the top end don’t look like me,” she said.

A family member once advised her to not wear a hijab at an interview for a scholarship at the Inns of Court School of Law in 2001, warning that it would affect her chances of landing the role.

“I decided that I was going to wear my headscarf because for me it’s so important to accept the person for who they are," Ms Arshad said.

"And if I had to become a different person to pursue my profession, it’s not something I wanted.”

The joint heads of St Mary’s Family Law Chambers said they were “delighted” to hear the news of her appointment.

“Raffia has led the way for Muslim women to succeed in the law and at the bar, and has worked tirelessly to promote equality and diversity in the profession,” Vickie Hodges and Judy Claxton said.

“It is an appointment richly deserved and entirely on merit, and all at St Mary’s are proud of her and wish her every success.”

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
May 18,2020

Bengaluru, May 18: Former Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has called a meeting of Congress Legislature Party (CLP) to discuss various issues related to coronavirus and "failures" of the state government in tackling the outbreak.

The meeting, which will be held on May 19 at 4 pm, will also discuss packages announced by the central and state government, the amendment to the APMC Act by the state cabinet and the cancellation of various schemes including Mathrushree and Santhwana scheme.

Earlier, Siddaramaiah had alleged that the Centre and Karnataka government failed in containing the coronavirus spread despite having enough time for preparations.

Meanwhile, the ongoing nationwide lockdown has been extended till May 31. 

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.