The Supreme Court on Monday stayed a Madras High Court order that had directed the Tamil Nadu government to ensure that no cow or calf is slaughtered in the state on the eve of Bakrid or on any other day.
A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued notice to the respondents after the Tamil Nadu government challenged the High Court's ruling.
Nearly two weeks ago, the state government moved the Supreme Court against the Madras High Court's order, which imposed a blanket ban on cow slaughter except in circumstances permitted under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Animal Preservation Act, 1958.
The Tamil Nadu government argued that the High Court's direction was inconsistent with the provisions of the 1958 Act.
Under the legislation, cattle may be slaughtered under specific conditions, including when an animal is over 10 years of age or is no longer fit for breeding or agricultural work, provided the competent authority issues the necessary certificate.
While hearing the matter, the Supreme Court observed that the High Court's order required "correction" and stayed its operation with immediate effect.
The apex court has now issued notice on the state's appeal, and the High Court's directions will remain suspended until further orders.
The case stems from a May 27 order passed by a division bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice V. Lakshminarayan. While observing that animal slaughter should be carried out only in authorised slaughterhouses, the bench also directed the state's Chief Secretary and senior police officials to ensure that no cow or calf was slaughtered on Bakrid or on any other day.
The High Court had further instructed the authorities to issue appropriate directions across the state to ensure compliance with its order. In its appeal, the Tamil Nadu government argued that these directions made the judgment internally inconsistent.
The state contended that the High Court had exceeded the scope of the law by imposing a blanket prohibition on cow slaughter, arguing that such a direction went beyond the framework laid down in the Tamil Nadu Animal Preservation Act.
The challenge centres on both the extent of the High Court's directions and the state's claim that the order was legally contradictory.
According to the state government, while the High Court permitted slaughter only at authorised slaughterhouses, it simultaneously imposed a complete ban on the slaughter of cows and calves on Bakrid and thereafter, despite such a prohibition not being contemplated under the existing law.
The original petition before the High Court had been filed by Surya, the state general secretary of the Indu Makkal Katchi, seeking directions to prevent the alleged illegal slaughter of cows in public places. The petitioner told the court that despite submitting a representation to the authorities, no action had been taken.
During the proceedings, the High Court examined the legal framework governing cow slaughter and referred to Article 48 of the Constitution, which forms part of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP). Article 48 directs the state to take steps to prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves and other milch and draught cattle.
The court also noted that Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Animal Preservation Act permits the slaughter of a cow only under limited circumstances. It observed that slaughter is allowed only if the animal is more than 10 years old, is unfit for breeding or agricultural work, and has been certified as such by the competent authority.
Holding that the provision must be interpreted in the light of Article 48, the High Court ruled that slaughter could take place only after obtaining the prescribed certificate and said this requirement could not be bypassed. It is pertinent to note that the Directive Principles of State Policy are not enforceable in courts.
The High Court also relied, in part, on a government order stating that restricting cow slaughter was necessary to improve milk production and strengthen the rural economy.
