This article is written by Surbhi Singh, an intern under Legal Vidhiya
Introduction
“There is no fundamental difference between man and animals in their ability to feel pleasure and pain, and happiness and misery.”
– Charles Darwin
In the world animal protection report 2020, India was ranked at “C” among 50 other countries where “A” being the highest score, “G” being the lowest.World Animal Protection assessed the animal welfare policies and legislation of 50 countries and clearly identified a worrying lack of adequate animal welfare laws. The index will help countries to put in place good animal welfare practices such as keeping animals clean, healthy and with sufficient space to exhibit natural behaviours.[1]
India is still behind others countries like Sweden, Austria and UK who are among the highest ranking countries. Despite having an overall average rank, we were still far behind in many parameters like we scored “E” in protecting the welfare of wild animals and despite having a “B” in parameter like laws causing animal sufferings we still witness cases like kerala elephant case where locals fed firecrackers filled pineapple to a pregnant elephant in 2021 and many cases like this comes to the knowledge of society which in turn shed a light to our animal protecting laws and different punishments for cruelty against animals.
Legal status of animals
“A legal person”, says Salmond, “is any subject-matter other than a human being to which
law attributes personality.” It includes an object, a mass of property, an institution, a group of human beings etc[2]. A legal person is a thigh or being which is treated as a person by law.
Animals do not have the status of a legal person,they do not have a legal personality in most of the countries. Animals are not persons in the eye of law and, therefore, they are not subjects of legal rights and duties. In ancient times, animals for some purposes, were treated as persons.There are a number of instances of this kind in ancient Indian stories where animals were sued in courts.But in modern times, no legal system recognizes animals as persons. Therefore they have no rights and liabilities. The human acts which are considered by law as wrongs against animals are, really speaking not wrongs against the animals, but are wrongs either against the person who owns that animal or against the society. In India, cruelty against animals (as defined in various statutes) is an offence, but at the same time this duty is not a duty towards the animals; it is a duty towards the society or the state. In our country a trust for the benefit of animals can be legally created.[3]
In Karnail Singh v. State of Haryana, 2019, on 2nd June, 2019, the Punjab and Haryana High Court made history by passing an applaudable judgment declaring that all animals are ‘legal persons’ and have their own set of rights, just like human beings do. In its 104 page order, the court recognized that all animals have honour, dignity and certain other inherent rights, which must be protected by law. The entire animal kingdom, including aquatic and avian species are declared to be legal entities having a distinct persona, along with corresponding rights, duties and liabilities of living persons.[4]
Some notable ones are Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, etc. who have declared that animals can no longer be subject to laws as an object or property. They are treated as a special category. This while has not given them the status of a legal person but has still imbued them with stronger rights.[5]
In 2014, Romanian MP introduced a bill that grants the dolphins the legal personhood of a ‘non-human person’. This would give these aquatic mammals legal rights. They can no longer be used for experimentation or human entertainment.[6]
Constitutional validity
Article 48A of directive principles of state policy of our indian constitution states “The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.” and article 51A(g) of fundamental duties states “to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures”
While they are not directly enforceable in Indian courts, they lay down the groundwork for legislations, policies and state directives in furtherance of animal protection at the Central and State levels. Moreover, they may be enforced in courts by taking an expansive judicial interpretation and bringing them within the ambit of the fundamental Right to Life and Liberty under Article 21 which is judicially enforceable.[7]
Item 14 of the State List provides that the States have the power to “[p]reserve, protect and improve stock and prevent animal diseases and enforce veterinary training and practice.”[8]
Item 17, 17A and 17B of the seventh schedule which is concurrent list states that, both state and centre have the power to legislate on this matter,
“17. Prevention of cruelty to animals.
[17A. Forests.
17B. Protection of wild animals and birds.]”
Laws related to animal welfare in India
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 is one of the most comprehensive laws on the subject of animal welfare in India. It is an Act of the Parliament passed on 26 December 1960 with a vision to prevent cruelties on animals.[9]
The main objective of the Act is:[10]
- The Act prevents unnecessary pain or suffering on animals.
- The Act enshrines provisions for establishing the Animal Welfare Board of India, its powers, functions, constitution, and term of the office of members of the Board.
- The Act enshrines the guidelines regarding the experimentation on animals for scientific purposes and empowers a committee to make rules with regards to such experiments.
- The Act restricts the exhibition and training of performing animals. Both the terms ‘exhibit’ and ‘train’ are separately defined under Section 21 of the Act.
Different forms of cruelty mentioned in this act are as follow:
- beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering.
- Employs any animal who is unfit for labour to be employed.
- wilfully and unreasonably administers any injurious drug or injurious substance to any animal.
- Carry or conveys any animal in such a manner to cause unnecessary pain or suffering.
- Keep animals in such a cage which permits its movements.
- keeps for an unreasonable time any animal chained.
- Neglecting to exercise any dog or keeping it confined.
- fails to provide such animals with sufficient food, drink or shelter.
- Abandoning any animal which might cause suffering and pain by starvation or thirst.
- Permits any animals with contagious or infectious disease to go and die on streets.
- Offer for sale any animal.
- which is suffering pain by reason of mutilation, starvation, thirst, overcrowding or other ill-treatment.
- mutilates any animal or kills any animal (including stray dogs) by using the method of strychnine injections in the heart or in any other unnecessarily cruel manner.
- solely with a view to providing entertainment – confines animals to make it prey of other animals and incites any animal to fight.
- promotes or takes part in any shooting match or competition wherein animals are released from captivity for the purpose of such shooting.
However , the first time offender is punished under this act with a fine not less than ten rupees and can extend upto fifty rupees, second offence committed within three years of the previous offence, with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees but which may extend to one hundred rupees or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with both.
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972
This Act provides for the protection of the country’s wild animals, birds, and plant species, in order to ensure environmental and ecological security. Among other things, the Act lays down restrictions on hunting many animal species.[11] The Wildlife Protection Act came into force on 9th September 1972. This was a much-needed legislation in order to protect the wild animals who were being tortured, poached and hunted down at an alarmingly increasing rate. The Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 consists 60 sections with VI schedules which was further divided into 8 chapters. As per Section 2 (37), the term ‘wildlife’ is defined as ‘any animal, aquatic or land vegetation which forms part of any habitat’. The Act came into force to protect India’s wildlife and the place where they live.[12]
However, this Act is somewhat flawed as it does not completely protect the wildlife. The state can give a list of animals that they would like to kill and thus the government declares that to be selective slaughter. Selective slaughter is still slaughter and hence we can say that the wildlife is not protected and the animals do not enjoy specific protection under the Act.[13]
Cosmetics rules, 2020
The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare adopted the revised Cosmetics Rules, 2020 as a consequence of suggestions provided by PETA India. The prescribed rules established a distinct and modernized regulatory framework for the development, production, distribution, and importation of cosmetic items.[14]
The regulations also included clauses assuring that the importing of cosmetics subjected to animal testing is strictly prohibited. India became the first nation in Asia to outlaw both animal testing of cosmetics and the components used in them as well as the importing of the tested goods.[15]
Prevention of cruelty to animals (slaughter house) rules, 2001
It states that no person should slaughter any animal that is pregnant or has an offspring of less than 3 months old, or is less than 3 months, within a municipal area except in a slaughter house recognised or licensed by the concerned authority empowered under the law for the time being in force to do so. The Animal welfare Board of /india or any person or Animal welfare Organisation authorised by it may inspect any slaughter house without notice to its owner or the person in charge of it at any time during the working hours to ensure that the provisions of these rules are being complied with. No punishment or fine is mentioned for the violation of this act.
Section 428 And 429 Of Indian Penal Code
With respect to Section 428 and 429 of the IPC, it states that it is illegal to harm or injure any animal through cruel acts such as poaching, injuring strays, throwing toxic substances on animals, etc. The injury can also be in the form of running over animals and injuring them with cars, bikes and other vehicles. Anyone who disobeys Section 428 and 429 of the IPC will be made to pay a penalty of minimum Rs.2000 or above. Some culprits can also be imprisoned for 5 years or above based on the severity of the injury caused.[16]
Section 428 states that any person who commits a cruel act such as killing, poisoning, or rendering useless any animal of the value of Rs.10 or more shall be imprisoned for 2 years including fine in most cases. Section 429 is similar to that of section 428 but the value changes from Rs. 10 to Rs. 50 and thus the punishment will be to imprison the culprit for a period of 5 years and above.[17]
Other countries
In the United Kingdom, the laws regarding cruelty towards animals and protection are very strict. the legislation speaks about both cruelties committed towards animals and negligence. in case if such acts are done, the wrongdoers can obtain a lifelong ban on ownership of pets, a maximum prison term of 51 weeks and a fine which can extend up to £20,000.[18]
In Germany, the constitution itself states that it is the responsibility of the state to protect the interests of future generations by conserving natural beings and animals. Germany is the very first country to protect animals under the Constitution.[19]
In the Netherlands, the Animal Welfare Act has provisions that deal with cruelty against animals and its punishments. Also, the duty to care for animals is enumerated in the Act. the protection also extends to the ban on testing cosmetics on animals.[20]
In Austria, the Animal Welfare Act, 2004 states that the welfare and protection of animals are equally important to that of humans. the country hosts one of the harshest anti-cruelty laws in Europe. the law bans owners of pets from cropping their dogs’ ears, tails, etc., has a provision that states farmers to not put their chicken in cages and ensures that small pet animals do not swelter in pet shops.[21]
Switzerland, has recognized the rights of animals through its constitution and separately states the importance of protecting the dignity of animals. Any activity that is violative of the right to dignity of animals is banned in the country.[22]
Important Cases
- Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, (2014)
The case majorly deals with practice of Jallikattu which consists of silver or gold coins tied on the bulls’ horns. People, in the earlier time, used to fight to get at the money placed around the bulls’ horns which depicted as an act of bravery. Later, it became a sport conducted for entertainment in which a fast-moving bull was corralled with ropes around its neck.[23]
It was held that AWBI is right in its stand that Jallikattu, Bullock-cart Race and such events per se violate Sections 3, 11(1)(a) and 11(1)(m)(ii) of PCA Act and hence upheld the notification dated 11.7.2011 issued by the Central Government, consequently, bulls cannot be used as performing animals, either for the Jallikattu events or Bullock-cart Races in the State of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or elsewhere in the country.[24]
In the case of Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, the Supreme Court stated that the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution applies to animals as well. Article 51A(g) of the Constitution also confers the fundamental duty “to have compassion for living creatures” on all citizens of the country in furtherance to this, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 was introduced by the Parliament.[25]
- State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat and Ors (2005)
Bombay Animal Preservation (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1994 was passed to introduce amendment in the Section 5 of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954. Section 5 permitted the slaughter of bulls and bullocks of above 16 years of age but the amendment deleted the age criterion which absolutely banned the slaughter of any bulls and bullocks irrespective of its age or utility.[26]
The question of the validity of this amendment was raised in the Gujarat High Court through a writ petition filed by three petitioners. The three petitioners were the PF person, President and Joint Secretary of a Trust which dealt with the business of selling and buying bull/bullocks and other animals and selling their meat as permitted by law. The petitioners contended that the amendment is interfering with their fundamental right to carry on business as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g). On 16-04-1998, the court held this amendment to be ultra vires the Constitution as it imposes unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right of the petitioners.[27]
The matter was moved to the Apex Court challenging the decision of Gujarat High Court through aspecial leave petition. On17-02-2005, the matter was placed in front of three-judges bench but the matter involved questions related to the provisions of the Constitution. So the matter was referred to a Constitutional Bench under Article 145(3) of the Constitution. On “19-07-2005, the matter was further referred to a seven-judges bench because of the existing prior orders of the constitutional benches which might need reconsideration”. Hence prolonging question again came into consideration in the State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat& others.[28]
Conclusion
Punishments of cruelty against animals as seen in the above laws is not severe at all except for section 429 which imprison the culprit for 5 years. Fines in almost all the acts is bare minimum, just enough for the sake of it. It fails to protect animals from violence and does not create any strictness or discipline among the people in all seriousness. Despite India having so many great laws regarding animal welfare, its punishments are not up to the mark which also leads to people not taking them seriously and not following them as the conditions in which animals are slaughtered and hassared has not improved even the slightest. Proper enforcement of laws is required with strict punishments and fines.
By:- Surbhi Singh, 1st year student, Campus Law Center, Faculty of law, University of Delhi.
Reference
Websites
- Adda274
- World animal protection
- News18
- Ipleaders
- SCC online
- Manupatra
- Clearias
- Ourlegalworld
- thebetterindia
[1]India ranks second in Global Animal Protection Index 2020, adda247, available at https://currentaffairs.adda247.com/india-ranks-second-in-global-animal-protection-index-2020/#:~:text=Sweden%2C%20the%20United%20Kingdom%2C%20and,of%20adequate%20animal%20welfare%20laws. , last seen on 21/04/23
[2]Studynama, jurisprudence eBook lectures notes, unit 4, legal personality, available at https://www.studynama.com/community/threads/jurisprudence-lecture-notes-pdf-ebook-download-for-llb-students.870/ , last seen on 22/04/23.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Case Comment: Karnail Singh and Others v. State of Haryana Animals are Legal Persons with Parents, CNLU LJ (9) [2020] 300
[5] A Study of Animals as Legal Persons, 1.1 ILR (2020) 91
[6] Ibid.
[7]Overview of animal laws in india, animallaw.info, available at https://www.animallaw.info/article/overview-animal-laws-india , last seen on 22/04/23
[8] Ibid.
[9]Punishment for animal cruelty and laws for animal welfare in India, ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/punishment-animal-cruelty-laws-animal-welfare-india/ , last seen on 22/04/23
[10] Ibid.
[11]Wildlife protection act,1972-UPSC notes, byjus, available at https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/wildlife-protection-act-1972/ , last seen on 22/04/23.
[12]Punishment For Animal Cruelty In India, lawcorner, available at https://lawcorner.in/punishment-for-animal-cruelty-in-india/#Wildlife_Protection_Act_1972 , last seen on 22/04/23.
[13] Ibid.
[14]Protection of Animals: Important Laws in India, clearias, available at https://www.clearias.com/protection-of-animals/#cosmetics-rules-2020 , last seen on 22/04/23.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Supra 12.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Covid-19 and the Plight of Animals in India : Safety and Prevention Approaches, 7.1 IJLS (2021) 19
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Animal Welfare Board of India v. A Nagaraja & Ors: Case Analysis, our legal world, available at https://www.ourlegalworld.com/animal-welfare-board-of-india-v-a-nagaraja-ors-case-analysis/ , last seen on 23/04/23.
[24]Ibid.
[25] Covid-19 and the Plight of Animals in India : Safety and Prevention Approaches, 7.1 IJLS (2021) 19.
[26]state of gujarat v/s. mirzapur moti kureshi kassab jamat & others, probono india, available at https://probono-india.in/research-paper-detail.php?id=267 , last seen on 23/04/23.
[27]Ibid.
[28]Ibid.
0 Comments