Back
Reverses Previous Order, Declares Cockfights Illegal Under Animal Cruelty Law
In a significant ruling that clarifies the legal status of cockfights, the has set aside a previous order that permitted such events. The of Justice C.V.Karthikeyan and Justice R.Sakthivel allowed a filed by the and other police officials, holding that cockfights are illegal under the .
The Order - A Conditional Permission
The case originated from a filed in by G.Manickam, a resident of Pattukottai, seeking permission to conduct cockfights as a traditional event. At that time, a had disposed of the petition with directions to the authorities to permit the cockfight subject to several conditions. These conditions required supervision by a veterinary doctor, ensured no injury to the birds, prohibited intoxication, and banned the use of knives tied to the birds' legs.
The Review Application
The District Collector, , and approached the High Court seeking review of this order. The petitioners argued that the directions issued by the earlier bench were contrary to the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, particularly Sections 3(2), 11, and 28, which expressly prohibit animal fights.
The Court examined the statutory framework and found merit in the petitioners' contention. The judgment noted that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act clearly outlaws events like cockfights. The earlier order, which attempted to permit the event with safeguards, was fundamentally flawed because the statute itself prohibits such activities.
Court's Ruling
"In view of the fact that the Statute prohibits such an event from taking place, we would allow the review application and hold that the directions issued by the
are
and totally unwarranted and should not act as a
in any application seeking permission to conduct cock fight in future,"
the Court observed.
The made it clear that the earlier directions cannot be relied upon as a . The review application was allowed with no costs.
Implications
This judgment underscores that no event involving animal fights can be permitted, even with conditions, if the statute declares it illegal. The ruling sends a strong message that cultural traditions cannot override statutory prohibitions against animal cruelty. It also reaffirms the importance of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act in protecting animals from exploitation.
This article is based on the judgment in .
