| Date: |
21-04-2015 |
| Subject: |
Maharashtra to HC: Beef ban does not violate Constitutional rights |
|
MUMBAI: The Maharashtra government on Monday claimed that it brought in the beef ban law to protect the cow and its progeny due to their many benefits — from milk to the use of dung and urine in making pest repellents and medicinal products.
In an affidavit filed before Bombay high court by Chitrakala Suryawanshi, deputy secretary, animal husbandry department, the state justified the Maharashtra Animal Preservation (Amendment) Act that bans the slaughter of bulls and bullocks along with cows. The government pointed to the state's agrarian economy and said the ban was a "reasonable restriction". The affidavit was submitted by Maharashtra advocate general Sunil Manohar.
Other than milk — which the state claimed scientific research had shown as valuable— its dung and urine were a source of fuel, manure and biogas, the affidavit said. "The waste is also used to prepare pest repellents and medicinal formulations, which lead to improve public health," the state contended.
The government denied that the law, which criminalizes even possession of beef, violates any fundamental rights. "It cannot be said that simply because the possession of meat of cow progeny is banned so as to give complete effect to the directive principles of the Constitution, the rights of the citizen under Article 21 to have his own choice of food stands violated or stultified," the affidavit said.
The state said the cow and its progeny were the backbone of Maharashtra's agrarian economy and the law was brought into effect to protect them and to prevent cruelty to animals.
Setting to rest another controversy, when it indicated that a ban on the slaughter of other animals could be considered, the government clarified it was only for cows, bulls and bullocks, and the possession of flesh of these animals. "There is no total ban on import of meat or livestock. The only ban is for possession of meat/flesh of cow progeny within the state of Maharashtra and there cannot be trade or commerce only of meat/flesh of cow progeny. All other kind of meat including that of buffalo is permitted to be possessed," added the affidavit. "Though the provision may result in affecting the import of cow progeny flesh, the same is only incidental to the real nature and character of the enactment and hence cannot affect the competence of the legislature to enact (the law)," the state said.
The government opposed any stay and said the law had received President's assent and was "in public interest". Petitioners challenging the ban law questioned the Act's Section 5D that criminalizes possession of beef even if imported from outside Maharashtra and in turn its consumption. Senior advocate Aspi Chinoy contended the beef ban law was contrary to Central laws like Food Safety and Security Act and Livestock Import Act that treats beef as "wholesome, and permissible food".
Source : timesofindia.indiatimes.com
|