Rajasthan High Court judge wants cow to be declared a national animal; Kerala HC declines to interfere with cattle sale ban notification

The Kerala High Court on Wednesday declined to entertain a PIL seeking quashing of the Centre's notification banning sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter.

Jaipur/Thiruvananthapuram/Chennai: The Rajasthan High Court on Wednesday directed the state government to coordinate with the Centre and take necessary steps to declare cow as a national animal.

In a direction that could further fuel the deeply divisive debate over beef consumption and vigilantism in the name of cow protection, Justice Mahesh Chand Sharma said the state's chief secretary and advocate general will be the legal custodians of cow.

"Nepal is a Hindu nation (sic) and has declared cow as national animal. India is a predominantly agricultural country based on animal rearing. As per Article 48 and 51A (g) (of the Constitution) it is expected from the state government that they would take action to get a legal entity for cow in this country," the judge said in the order passed on his last day in office.

He suggested that it was expected of the state government that it would amend the Rajasthan Bovine Animals Act 1995 to enhance punishment for cow slaughter from three years in jail to life imprisonment.

Later, Justice Sharma told a TV news channel that his directions were recommendatory in nature and not binding.

 "It (action against those who kill cows) is the voice of my soul, your soul, everybody's soul. Law has stemmed from 'dharma' (religion) and not vice-versa," he said, as per PTI.

When the reporter asked him for the rationale behind declaring cow slaughter a heinous crime, he said,"There cannot be a more heinous crime than this. Cow is like mother. She saves people from different diseases."

The directions were issued while the court was hearing a matter related to a government-run cow shelter where hundreds of animals had perished in Jaipur last year due to alleged neglect.

Justice Sharma's suggestions came amid a firestorm of protests raging in several parts of the country, particularly the southern states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu against a new notification issued by the Centre banning sale and purchase of cattle at animal markets for slaughter.

On the other hand, the Kerala High Court today declined to entertain a PIL seeking quashing of the Centre's notification banning sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter, observing that there was no constitutional violation in the rules.

A division bench headed by Chief Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh observed that its interference in the Centre's notification was not warranted.

The bench said it could not see any prohibition in selling and consumption of beef in the notification, following which the PIL was withdrawn by petitioner AG Sunil.

Meanwhile, a single bench of the court directed the Centre to file its counter affidavit with regard to the impact of the notification banning sale and purchase of cattle for slaughter.

Considering a batch of petitions challenging rule 22 of the notification imposing restrictions on the sale of cattle, Justice P B Suresh Kumar said the court will consider the application for the stay of the notification after seeing the Centre's counter.

The division bench headed by the Chief Justice, while declining to entertain Sunil's petition, observed that it could not find any illegality in the rules as apprehended by the petitioner.

The petitioner had contended that the notification violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Art 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution and that it should be quashed.

There was no constitutional violation in the notification as alleged by the petitioner, it said.

The high court's observation came a day after the Madras High Court's Madurai bench stayed for four weeks the Centre's contentious notification on two PILs.

The petitioners in the Madras High Court have contended that the rules should have been approved by Parliament first.

A Madurai bench, comprising justices MV Muralidharan and CV Karthikeyan had yesterday issued the interim order on the two pleas which said that the rules should be quashed as they were against the Constitution, breached the principle of federalism and were contrary to the parent legislation - Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960. 

(With PTI inputs)