Judgment

R. B. MISRA J. :- Slaughter of cows and calves has been a sensitive issue and it has generated violent sentimental differences time and again between different sections of the people of this country. Part IV of the Constitution of India enshrines what are called the Directive Principles of State Policy. These Directive Principles are not enforceable in a court of law but are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and are to be applied by States in making laws. Article 48 contained in Part IV provides :

"48. The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle."

2. It appears that pursuant to Article 48 of the Constitution several States enacted laws for the preservation and prohibition of the slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle. The State of Bihar enacted the Bihar Preservation and Improvement of Animals Act, 1955; the U.P. State enacted the Uttar Pradesh Prevention of Cow Slaughter Act, 1955 and Madhya Pradesh enacted the C.P. and Berar Animal Preservation Act, 1949. hereinafter referred to as the Bihar, U.P. and C.P. & Berar Acts respectively, for short. These Acts put a total ban on the slaughter of all categories of animals or species of bovine cattle. The constitutional validity of these Acts was challenged in Mohd. Hanif Quareshi v. State of Bihar 1959 SCR 629, by those whose trade or business was affected, as being violative of Arts. 14, 19(1)(g) and 25 of the Constitution. This Court held :

"The result is that we uphold and declare that the Bihar Act in so far as it prohibits the slaughter of cows of all ages and calves of cows and calves of buffaloes, male and female, is constitutionally valid and we hold that, in so far as it totally prohibits the slaughter of she-buffaloes, breeding bulls and working bullocks (cattle and buffalo), without prescribing any test or requirement as to their age or usefulness, it infringes the rights of the petitioners under Art. 19(1)(g) and is to that extent void.

As regards the U.P. Act we uphold and declare, for reasons already stated, that it is constitutionally valid in so far as it prohibits the slaughter of cows of all ages and calves of cows, male and female, but we hold that in so far as it purports to totally prohibit the slaughter of breeding bulls and working bullocks without prescribing any test or requirement as to their age or usefulness. it offends against Art. 19(1)(g) and is to that extend void.

As regards the Madhya Pradesh Act we likewise declare that it is constitutionally valid in so far as it prohibits the slaughter of cows of all ages and calves of cows, male and female, but that it is void in so far as it totally prohibits the slaughter of breeding bulls and working bullocks without prescribing any test or requirement as to their age or usefulness.

We also hold that the Act is valid in so far as it regulates the slaughter of other animals under certificates granted by the authorities mentioned therein."

3. The Court observed that these Acts were made by the States in discharge of the obligation laid on them by Art. 48 of the Constitution.

4. Article 19(1)(g) confers a fundamental right upon a citizen to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Article 14 enjoins that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Article 13(2) provides that the State shall not make any law which takes away or a bridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.

5. Dealing with Fundamental Rights as given in Part III and the Directive Principles as detailed in Part IV of the Constitution, the Constitution Bench in Minerva