Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
People For The Ehical Treatment Of Animals (PETA) India, Represented By One Of Its Director, Khushboo Gupta, Wife Of Shubham Sachdeva – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Represented By Its Chief Secretary, Government Of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Devashis Baruah, J.)
Heard Mr. D. Das, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. D.J. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in both the writ petitions. Mr. B.J. Talukdar, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. It is seen from the materials on record that service has been duly affected upon the respondent No. 3 but none has appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 3.
3. People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is the writ petitioner in both the writ petitions. The writ petitioner claims to be a Charitable Company incorporated under Section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 and continues to operate under the Companies Act, 2013. The writ petitioner further claims to be a reputed organization working for the promotion and protection of animal welfare and animal rights in India. In both the writ petitions, the writ petitioner had challenged the Notification dated 27.12.2023 whereby the Governor of Assam have issued an SOP/guidelines to ensure that buffalo and other traditional birds fight are allowed to be organized in all places where it has been traditionally organized with specific
The court ruled that traditional animal fights are impermissible under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Wildlife Protection Act, emphasizing that cultural practices cannot override legal ....
The Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act was declared unconstitutional as it conflicted with the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, which prioritizes animal welfare and prohibits cruelty.
The court affirmed that traditional festivals involving animals must comply with strict welfare conditions to minimize cruelty, informed by recent judicial interpretations.
The Act's provisions allowing regulated slaughter do not violate Article 48, thus aligning with constitutional mandates for animal preservation.
The court affirmed the rights of community dogs under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and mandated designated feeding zones to balance the rights of animals and residents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
