US Constitution Trumps Presidential Tariff Powers
28 Feb 2026
Non-Compliance with Court Summons Amounts to Contempt: Allahabad HC Issues Warrant Against HDFC Life Branch Head in Cheating Bail Case
02 Mar 2026
Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
*Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, C. J., Gopala Krishna Tamada, J.
Ramratan Jhawar v. Govt. of A.P. and Another
Headnote: Read headnote
1. Heard Smt. Jayasree Sarathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Animal Husbandry for the respondents.
2. The writ petition was filed as public interest litigation by the petitioner questioning the constitutional validity of S. 6 of Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of Cow Slaughter and Animal Preservation Act , 1977 (Act No. 11 of 1977) (for short the 'Act) so far as it permits the slaughter of animals mentioned in the Act under certificates given by the competent authority appointed under the Act. According to the petitioner, the Act is not giving effect to the policy enshrined in Art. 48 of the Directive Principles in Part IV of the Constitution of India .
3. The aforesaid Act makes a declaration that it was passed for giving effect to Art. 48 of the Directive Principle of State Policy. Art.48 prohibits the slaughter of cows
The Act's provisions allowing regulated slaughter do not violate Article 48, thus aligning with constitutional mandates for animal preservation.
Provisions governing vehicle seizure under the Chhattisgarh Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act do not infringe fundamental rights and are valid as reasonable regulations for public interest.
The increased licensing fee imposed for cattle export is deemed a tax rather than a regulatory fee, making it ultra vires the powers granted under the Act.
Interim custody of seized property under Section 451 of Cr. P.C. should be granted absent rival claims, focusing on preservation pending trial.
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 ....
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
Listen Article