Animal Rights Amid Corona Lockdown

While the whole country was experiencing nation-wide lockdown due to corona virus a writ petition (W. P. (C). TMP-28 OF 2020 by hearing parties N. PRAKASH V. STATE OF KERALA) was filed in the High Court of Kerala. The petitioner, N. Prakash, is an owner of three cats. He had applied for a travel pass according to the rules & regulations of lockdown as his stock of cat food was about to finish. The petitioner has mentioned in his case that he is pure vegetarian therefore non vegetarian food cannot be cooked. As a result of the situation petitioner applied for travel pass. But it got rejected.

The petitioner has specially mentioned that the cats were fed with “Meo-Persian” biscuits. A packet of 7 kgs of these biscuits would suffice the stock for around 3 weeks. Usually the petitioner used to buy cat food from a pet hospital named “Felican”. But due to corona virus lockdown Felican’s cat food stock was exhausted. Therefore as a consequence, he inquired for cat food with Cochin Pet Hospital. He got a positive response from the hospital.

Henceforth the petitioner had filed a petitioner before the Kerala High Court. Decisions from Animal Welfare Board of India V. A. Nagaraja (2014) 7 SCC 547 & provisions of Prevention of Cruelty on Animals Act, 1960 were adduced from his side. From the Nagaraja case it was submitted that “Every species has a right to life and security, subject to the law of the land, which includes depriving its life, out of human necessity. Right to live in a healthy and clean atmosphere and right to be safeguarded against the human beings who inflict unnecessary pain is a right guaranteed to the animals Under Sections 3 and 11 of the PCA Act read with Article 51A(g) of the Constitution. Right to get food and right to shelter are also guaranteed rights under Sections 3 and 11 of the PCA Act and the Rules framed under the Act, especially when they are domesticated. Right to dignity and fair treatment is, therefore, not confined to human beings alone, but applies to animals as well.” Sections 3 & 11 of the PCA Act, 1960 were also cited which were read with article 51A of the constitution.

To this case A.K. JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. & SHAJI P. CHALY, J. have given their judgement.

Justice Nambiar said that ‘the doors of judicial institutions must be open to the knocks of hapless citizens.’ He also said that ‘the decision of the Supreme Court in Nagaraja (Supra),manifests this shift in judicial thinking, from one of merely safeguarding animal welfare, to recognizing a right and dignity in animals to live lives free from cruelty’.

Justice Chaly observed that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 is brought ‘to prevent the unnecessary pain & infliction on animals’. He emphasized on the liability of the pet owner under the section 11 of the PCA Act, 1960 and said that ‘Section 11 is a penal provision, and thereby, on the owner depriving the animal food and shelter, such an owner is liable to be punished with fine in accordance with the periodicity of the offence.’  He also put light on the fact that the Government of India has also exempted the transportation of animal food from the restrictions of Covid-19.

Therefore, the court allowed the writ petition & directed the authorities to issue a pass to the petitioner.

By

Harsh Vardhan Gupta,

Student Reporter, INBA