The Supreme Court has been approached by the Animal rights organisation PETA(People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) seeking a review of its May 18 verdict that upheld the validity of the amendments made by Tamil Nadu permitting Jallikattu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The review plea stated that these sports involve the exploitation of animals through the use of violence, force, agitation, and coercion to elicit fight or flight responses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
PETA submitted that sports like Jallikattu against the natural instinct, behaviour and anatomy of the bulls\/bullocks\/buffaloes, serve no essential purpose, and cause untold suffering, pain and cruelty to the animals used for such sports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These activities, particularly Jallikattu and bullock cart races, lead to frequent incidents of severe injuries and fatalities, affecting both bulls and humans, including participants, spectators, and even minor children, annually, the plea further contended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“The Judgement is a retrograde step which undoes dynamic and beneficial constitutional interpretation and contradicts established environmental law and animal welfare jurisprudence,” <\/em>PETA asserted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the judgment sought to be reviewed, a Constitution Bench of Justice\u00a0KM Joseph,Justice \u00a0Ajay Rastogi,\u00a0Justice Aniruddha Bose,\u00a0Justice Hrishikesh Roy, and\u00a0Justice CT Ravikumar\u00a0had held that the amendments made by the Tamil Nadu government to the PCA Act were introduced to reduce the pain and suffering of bovines and to allow the sport to continue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n The top court had also\u00a0upheld laws allowing Kambala and bull cart racing\u00a0in Karnataka and Maharashtra.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court had further said that the laws do not violate Articles 51A(g) and 51A(h), and thus do not infringe Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Before this, in May 2014, the apex court had held that Jallikattu was\u00a0violative of the rights of the animals involved\u00a0as well as the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Specifically with regard to the cultural aspect of the sport, the apex court had held at the time that Jallikattu as practiced today, had\u00a0never been the culture or tradition of Tamil Nadu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Therefore, the Tamil Nadu Jallikattu Regulation Act of 2009 (TNJR Act), which regulated the practice, was struck down in 2014.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, in January 2016, the Central government issued a new notification carving out an exception for Jallikattu and bullock cart races from the scope of the PCA Act. That notification came to be challenged before the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Later, the Tamil Nadu government enacted the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act of 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These, in effect, paved way for bull-taming sports like Jallikattu to take place.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The notification and the amendments came to be challenged before the top court which upheld the same in May this year.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Supreme Court has been approached by the Animal rights organisation PETA(People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) seeking a review of its May 18 verdict that upheld the validity of the amendments made by Tamil Nadu permitting Jallikattu. The review plea stated that these sports involve the exploitation of animals through the use of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":293674,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[246,64,2176],"tags":[4694,4701,20232],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/d2r2ijn7njrktv.cloudfront.net\/IL\/uploads\/2022\/12\/03150441\/Supreme-Court-Sanjay-I-1-min.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315556"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=315556"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/315556\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/293674"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=315556"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=315556"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.indialegallive.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=315556"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}