Circus - Government of India order prohibiting usage of Animals in Circus Valid - Animals have fundamental rights -Circus animals are being force to perform unnatural tricks, are housed in cramped cages, subjected to fear, hunger, pain, not to mention the undignified way of life they have to live, with no respite and the impugned notification has been issued in conformity with the changing scenario, values of human life, philosophy of the Constitution, prevailing conditions and the surrounding circumstance to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on animals. Though not homosapiens, they are also beings entitled to dignified existence and humane treatment sans cruelty and torture. In many respects, they comport better than humans, they kill to eat and eat to live and not live to eat as some of us do, they do not practice deception, fraud, or falsehood and malpractices as humans do, they care for their little ones expecting nothing in return, they do not proliferate as we do depleting the already scarce resources of the earth, for they practice sex restraint by seasonal mating, nor do they inhale the lethal smoke of tobacco polluting the atmosphere and inflicting harm on fellow beings. All animals except the very lowest exhibit some degree of intelligent behavior, ranging from learned responses to complex reasoning. Many believe that the lives of humans and animals are equally valuable. [N.R.Nair vs Union of India. 2000 (2) KLT 625 = AIR 2000 Ker 340 = 2000 (2) KLJ 1 = ILR 2001 (3) Ker 12. K.Narayanakurup & Sankaranarayanan (JJ) ]
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 - Sec. 22 - Banning the training and exhibition of animals -Animals in zoos cannot be equated with animals in circus. Notification banning the training and exhibition of animals in Circus is valid. Banning is not arbitrary on the ground of absence of rules to regulate exhibition, training, transportation and housing of animals. Fundamental duty of a citizen to have compassion for animals and to refrain from inflicting unnecessary pain and suffering on them. [Jumbo Circus vs Union of India. 2000 (2) KLT 625 = AIR 2000 Ker. 340 = 2000 (2) KLJ 1 . K.Narayana Kurup & KV.Sanakaranarayanan (J)]
Slaughtering of animals – Abattoir (mechanised slaughtering machine) – Report of Committee – Implementation – Water Pollution.Company engaged in exporting meat –Installation of mechanised modern slaughtering machine after the finding be an expert body that no harm. No pollution caused. Direction issued to make report about the depletion of cattle population. [ Akhil Bharat Goseva Sangh and others vs. State of A.P. 1995 SCC (Supp) Vol.3 P.370 = 1997 (7) JT 190]
Slaughter House – Unauthorised – Causing pollution – Right of residents infringed. Unauthorised slaughter house . Blood of slaughtered animals running on land in drains without being treated . Trade effluent discharged not in accordance with the prescribed norms. Strong stench emanting from the area causing pollution . State cannot allow residents to live in such unhygienic condition. High Court directed for closure of slaughter house immediately. [ Residents of Sanjay Nagar vs State of Rajasthan . AIR 2004 Raj 116 . ]
Slaughtering in front of children should be avoided – Adverse impact on the minds of children should be avoided. Directions issued. “As far as practicable the slaughtering/killing of animals should be done in the place where children are not exposed to such slaughtering/killing. That would prevent unnecessary adverse impacts on the impressionable minds of children. The State authorities should ensure that such preventive actions as are necessaryin the matter are taken. “ – directions issued. [ A.V.Krishnan Moosad vs Government of Kerala. O.P.No. 24007 of 1999. Arijit Pasayat (CJ) and K.S.Radhakrishnan (J)]