The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently dismissed a petition to organize bull racing during the traditional festival ‘Urusa’ in Renata village, Kurnool District, citing a violation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (PCA) Act.
According to Justice B.S. Bhanumathi, the proposed bull race violates Section 11(1)(a) of the PCA and also Section 3 of the Act.
“Thus, what is prohibited by law cannot be permitted,” the court stated.
A writ plea was filed contesting the authorities’ decision to deny permission to hold a ‘banda laagudu poteelu’ (bull race), a ‘pouranika natakam’ (mythological play), and the use of loudspeakers on April 11 at Remata village, Kurnool District.
According to the petition, the Urusu has been held in the village since time immemorial in honour of Sri Sri Sri Gokaramayya Swami during the month of April. Along with the Urusu, it has been a tradition to organize competitions involving farmers, the court was told.
The petitioner had sought the police for permission to hold a bull racing and a mythological performance on April 11. However, the respondents denied the permit, claiming that there have been numerous fights and murders in Gokaraya Urusu in the past, and that allowing the activities would disrupt law and order. An intelligence report also warned of the possibility of riots and fighting during the Urusu.
According to the petitioner, “in the objection raised by the police, no objection was raised with regard to pain to animals as per Section 11 (1) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, but now such contention is being raised.”
The respondent’s attorney objected to the petition, claiming that the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, notably Sections 3 and 11(1), would prohibit the petitioners from holding a bullfight. The lawyer also alluded to the Supreme Court ruling in Animal Welfare Board of India vs. A. Nagaraju, in which the Jalaikattu celebration was deemed in violation of the PCA Act.
He further said that if permission is granted to this organisation, another competing group will be ready to perform the same play, resulting in conflicts between the two groups and significant law and order concerns. Furthermore, it was said that police officers are preoccupied with other obligations, such as SSC exams, and that there is insufficient police force to ensure a calm celebration.
The court determined that the bull race would fall within the requirement of Section 11(1)(a)(m) and (n) of the PCA, which forbids cruel treatment of animals.
It also violates Section 3, which states that anybody in charge of an animal must take all reasonable steps to ensure its well-being and avoid inflicting undue pain or suffering on it, according to the court.
The court cited Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraju, in which it was determined that “taming of an animal for domestic use and taming of an animal for exhibition or entertainment are entirely different.” Section 2 (c) of the TNRJ Act refers to “bull taming,” which contradicts and contradicts the language of bull tamers. Bull tamers, therefore, tame the bulls in the arena during Jallikattu, which, according to the State Act, is not for the animal’s well-being and causes unnecessary pain and suffering, which is exactly what the Central Act (the PCA Act) wants to prevent for the well-being and welfare of animals, which is also against the bulls’ basic natural instinct.”
The court did, however, authorize the mythological play on the condition that everyone involved with it, whether conducting or participating, preserve calm during the performance and do not cause any law and order problems.
