SC rejects Tamil Nadu’s plea for review of Jallikattu verdict

"We are unable to hold that there is any connection or association of jallikattu with the right of freedom of religion in Article 25," said SC.

By: PTI | New Delhi | Updated: November 28, 2016 8:18 pm
jallikattu, Tamil Nadu, supreme court, bull game in tamil nadu, India news, Indian Express Jallikattu, also known eruthazhuvuthal, is a bull-taming sport played in Tamil Nadu as a part of the Pongal harvest festival. (Wikimedia Commons)

The Supreme Court has dismissed the Tamil Nadu government’s plea seeking review of its 2014 verdict banning use of bulls for jallikattu events in the state and bullock-cart races across the country, saying that there was no connection of jallikattu with the right to freedom of religion under the Consitution.

A bench of justices Dipak Misra and R F Nariman observed that when a bull is “tamed” for the purpose of an event, “the fundamental concept runs counter to the welfare of the animal which is the basic foundation of PCA (Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) Act”.

Watch what else is making news

“We are unable to hold that there is any connection or association of jallikattu with the right of freedom of religion in Article 25,” it said.

The apex court said there was a “frontal collision and apparent inconsistency” between the PCA Act and the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009.

“It is inconceivable that a bull which is a domestic animal should be tamed for entertainment and a wide ground can be put forth that it is not a ticketed show, but meant for celebrating the festival of harvest.

“Such a celebration for giving pleasure to some, both the participating and the people watching it is such an act that is against the welfare of animals and definitely amount to treating the animal with cruelty,” the bench said.

It also dealt with the arguments advanced by senior advocate Shekhar Naphade, appearing for Tamil Nadu, who had said that every festival has the root in religion and when jallikattu is an event that takes place after harvest, it has religious flavour and such an ethos cannot be disregarded.

“Though the aforesaid argument is quite attractive, we have no hesitation in saying that such an interpretation is an extremely stretched one and inevitably result in its repulsion and we do so. Such kind of imaginative conception is totally alien to the fundamental facet of Article 25 and, therefore, we are compelled to repel the submission,” it said.

“In view of the aforesaid analysis, we do not perceive any merit in this review petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu and, accordingly, it stands dismissed,” the bench said.

The apex court had on January 21 dismissed similar pleas for re-examination of the 2014 judgement.

The court, during in-chamber proceedings, had dismissed the review petitions filed by some residents of Tamil Nadu seeking reconsideration of the ban order on the controversial bull-taming sport.

On January 8, the Centre had issued a notification lifting the ban on jallikattu in Tamil Nadu with certain restrictions, which was challenged in the apex court by Animal Welfare Board of India, People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India, a Bangalore-based NGO and others.

The apex court had stayed the notification.

Jallikattu, also known eruthazhuvuthal, is a bull-taming sport played in Tamil Nadu as a part of the Pongal harvest festival.

The court in its 2014 judgement had said that bulls cannot be used as performing animals, either for jallikattu events or bullock-cart races in the states of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or elsewhere in the country and banned their use across the country.

The apex court had declared Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009 as constitutionally void, being violative or Article 254(1) of the Constitution.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. S
    Shereen
    Jan 19, 2017 at 12:15 pm
    Ppl actually dnt take issues of other states very important but wen it comes to TAMIL NADU it atleast reaches right below from the ants to the largest existing Animals .............. So disappointing that no body considers Our state one among the Indian states! ! ! ! We can't blame the Supreme court for the kind of decision it takes but there is no law that we can't question back ! We the youngsters r powered 2 ask back our cultural heritage and we won't withdraw frm anything that is related to Our State
    Reply
    1. N
      Niladrinath Mohanty
      Nov 28, 2016 at 4:03 pm
      Well done the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
      Reply
      1. N
        nandha
        Dec 3, 2016 at 5:02 am
        ban devali festival too it produce noise pollution affect animals that also cruelty. we can made up any thing to suit animal cruelty. In reality they don't care about animals, just they want ban centuries old sport thats the agenda. foreign NGO PETA has some business interest and some upper cl Hindus r working together to achiev this ban. Any way this is how India conqured by foreign powers, now history repeat once again. This is just the beginning.
        Reply
        1. S
          Santhosh Kumar.R
          Dec 24, 2016 at 10:30 am
          OMG... devali festival "too" it produce noise pollution affect animals that also cruelty.lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;First you ban that all other things... If you can ? lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Do you you're wearing a dress right? I'll take full 2 well growth trees to manufacture them( PRINTING, DRYING, DYING process etc...)lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Devali comes once in a year , but dress clothes are produced every minute in a day. it causes earth a global warming "too".lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Also like factories and many more... if u can stop them?
          Reply
          1. Y
            YNS
            Nov 28, 2016 at 3:58 pm
            SC has done the right thing. How taming Bulls is entertainment? People of TN should understand this is cruelty. lt;br/gt;lt;br/gt;Other than that in such celebrations not only the Bulls are tamed but also lots of human beings are injured or killed. Do you call this entertainment and celebration? Come-on this is 21st Century.
            Reply
            1. Load More Comments