BAN ON SLAUGHTERING OF MEAT FOR A SHORT TERM NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL: BOMBAY HC
BAN ON SLAUGHTERING OF MEAT FOR A SHORT TERM NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL: BOMBAY HC
-Shanika Shukla
BACKGROUND
Paryushana Parv is a holy annual festival of Jain, which is celebrated for 9-10 days in the last week of August and the first week of September. The Jains usually fast, praying and meditate in this event to increase their spiritual level. On 7 September 2004, the state of Maharashtra issued a government resolution to all the commissioner stating that all the abattoir and meat selling shops to remain closed each year at the time of Paryushana Parv.
In 2008, in the case of Hinsa Virodhak Sangh vs. Mirzapur Moti Kuresh Jamat & ors where the Ahmadabad Civil body passed a resolution ordering all the abattoir to be closed due to Paryushan, the respondent argued that the closure of abattoir a slaughtering house violates Article 19(1) (g), a fundamental right in the Indian constitution.
According to Article 19(1) (g)
of Constitution of India provide Right to Practice any Profession or to carry
on any occupation, trade or business to all the citizen subject to article
19(6) which states the nature of restriction that can be imposed by the state
upon the above right of the citizen.
The respondent also stated that
it could not be called a reasonable restriction just because a particular
section of society feels that the closure of slaughtering house will be in
consonance with their religious ideologies (Jainism ideology of Ahinsa, nonviolence)
for that particular period of time.
CURRENT ISSUES
On 5 September 2019, the Bombay high court refused to interfere in the resolution passed by the government to the municipal corporation and state of Maharashtra to ensure that all the abattoir and slaughtering house are closed during the Paryushan Parv celebrated by followers of Jainism and Bombay HC declared that such Ban for short term is not Unconstitutional. A divisional bench of chief justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Bharati Dangre heard the PIL filed by Mehul Mepani along with the writ petition filed by Bombay mutton dealer association.
In 2015 when the municipal
corporation of greater Mumbai and Mira Bhayandar municipal corporation issued
circular, based on 2004 government resolution, ordering all the abattoir and
meat selling shops to remain closed during the occasion of prayushan parv, it was challenged
in the form of PIL and writ petition. The court referring to the 2008 case of
the Ahmadabad civil body, said that, “We should not trouble ourselves with the
jurisprudence as we have the apex court judgment of 2008 (5SCC33) in Hinsa Virodhak Sangh vs. Mirzapur Moti Kuresh Jamat
& ors.”
In which the Supreme Court stated
that the duration of 9 days is a very short duration of time. Being in the
country having diversity in religious norms and beliefs, one should not be so
over sensitive or over protective regarding their traditions when it is being
done out of respect for the sentiments of
a particular section of society. Moreover, as 9 days is a short duration
in whole year of 365 days, there will be no huge loss suffered by any shop
owner.
Mepani advocate Kruti Venkatesh
argued that the judgment of the supreme court was distinguishable as the judgment
held a ban on the slaughtering of the livestock and not on the selling of the meat.
In addition, ban and control over what one eats violates the right of life and
personal liberty of an individual.
CONCLUSION
In the recent case of Mehul Mepani,
on the argument of the advocate Kruti Venkatesh, the divisional bench referring
to the apex court judgment on Ahmadabad case held that,” in our opinion, the
slaughtering and selling of meat would make no difference for the reason of the
ration of law laid down by the SC. As stated by the supreme court the ban is
for a short duration and for the harmony and sentiments of a particular section
of society. It, from nowhere infringes or violates the right of privacy of an
individual as the choice of what kind of food one can eat is not infringed. Therefore,
the prohibition on slaughtering and sale of meat for 9 days duration would not
be unconstitutional. The bench did not pass any further order in the view of
another matter on the same question pending in the Supreme Court.
Comments
Post a Comment