New Delhi: Pulling up the Centre for trying to "import a Roman-type gladiator sport" despite a judgement that clearly banned Jallikattu as cruelty and crime to animals, the Supreme Court asked why bulls should be made to suffer merely for the entertainment of humans. A Bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman tested the legality of the Centre's January 7 notification permitting Jallikattu.
"Can bulls be contemplated for entertainment of human mind? Bulls are supposed to rest, why should they race," they asked. The Bench further said that if the argument was that Jallikattu was a "sport", it was a "cruel" sport and cruelty on animals was prohibited by the law. When senior advocate for Tamil Nadu Shekhar Naphade said when humans run marathons, why can't bulls be part of a sport. Justice Misra said, "Humans have free will, bulls are forced into it." The Apex Court called for compassion to animals citing it as our constitutional obligation, posting the matter for further hearing on November 16.
The Tamil Nadu government highlighted how there was nothing wrong in farmers practising Jallikattu in the semi-arid regions of the State if the Spanish Senate could declare the "far more cruel" sport of bull-fighting a cultural heritage. The Centre had supported the state's line that Jallikattu was not mere organised entertainment but an "age-old tradition practised for time immemorial". To which Justice Misra retorted, "You say that Jallikattu is an age-old tradition, so was child marriage until it was declared a crime."
The 2014 Supreme Court judgment had termed Jallikattu "inherently cruel" and specifically held that no regulations or guidelines should be allowed to dilute or defeat the spirit of a welfare legislation like Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and constitutional principles.
