Bakra Eid, also known as Eid-Ul-Adha, where thousands of cattle, goats, and buffaloes specifically are slaughtered under the garb of religion as the mark of “celebration”. It is very significant to note herein that in Bharat, whenever the Hindu festival approaches, liberal sentiments, pseudo-secular appeals, pious knowledge and awareness appeals are being carried such as saving milk during mahashivratri, pollution of Deepawali, saving water on Holi and various others but the roads of sentiments, appeal, awareness are silent and mute on the day which is termed as Festival to justify Animal cruelty in the name of religion i.e, Bakra Eid. We should understand that India is a Secular Country, and therefore, the slaughtering of animals in the garb of religion can be the righteous thing to justify the merciless act by the community.
Some questions should be raised so as to understand whether the Slaughter of Animals under the Garb of Religion violates the principles of the Constitution and the law of Land:
Whether the Constitution of India allows professing or propagating the religious practices against the public order, morality and against the environment.
Whether the slaughtering of cattle under the name of religion violates Article 48 (Directive Principle of State Policy) or not.
Whether the merciless act under the shadow of religion is against the Prevention of Cruelty Act of 1960.
Whether the state, under the essence of a Secular Democratic Nation, can intervene if any act of religious character violates the very basic reflection of the Constitution.
Defining Secularism in the context of Eid-Ul-Adha
India is a Secular Nation. The country adopted the term “SECULAR” under 42nd Amendment in 1976, and thereafter preamble changes to “We the People of India, having resolved to Constitute India into Sovereign, Socialist, Secular Democratic Republic….” The concept of secularism enshrined in the Constitution is to provide citizens of the Nation with liberty to thought, belief, faith and worship at one end, but the framers on the other side made sure that no liberty shall be absolute but with limited restrictions so that it does not hamper the very principle of secularism by violating belief, faith others at the same time. Secularism is neither Anti God nor pro-God; it treats alike the devout, the antagonists and the atheist. It eliminated God from the matter of state and ensured that “no one” shall be discriminated against on the grounds of religion, and therefore, it is the responsibility of the state to treat all religions equally.
It is significant to mark herein that to maintain the sanctity of Secularism and the Secular fabric, the state should be responsive to its responsibility towards other religions and the sects of different communities. The state is duty-bound to follow the principles of the Indian Constitution of Equality and Constitutional Morality. Whereupon, in the very case of S.R.Bomani Vs. Union of India. The Supreme Court has held that “Secularism Is the Basic Structure of the Constitution”. And therefore, the State should treat every religion equally; any diversion from which hampers the secular fabric of the country. The question now arises whether the practice of slaughtering of animals in the name of religion is violative of the principles of the Constitution of India (Fundamental Right and Directive Principle of State Policy) then it is also against the principles of “Secularism” because there would be no Secularism if any act is against the Constitution of India. It is, therefore, the very basic reason to justify the merciless act of animal slaughtering against the Constitution of India, and the need of an hour is to extend the ban by the interference of the state so that the sanctity of religion and secularism should be maintained.
Slaughtering Of Animals in the Name of Religion is Violative of Article 25 and Article 48 of Constitution of India
A number of Animals will be slaughtered and have always been slaughtered in the name of religion on Eid-Ul-Adha as a sign of celebration, which is termed “Qurbani” and means “Closeness”. It is significant to mark herein that the “Custom” of slaughtering of cattle in the name of God is in consonance with the Fundamental Right enshrined under Article 25 of Constitution of India or against the Freedom of Religion provided thereunder. For a better understanding, Article 25 is mentioned below:
Article 25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion
(1)Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.
(2)Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law—
(a)regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which maybe associated with religious practice;
(b)providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.
Explanation I.—The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.
Explanation II.—In sub-clause (b) of clause (2), the reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jains or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.
As per the genuine and unbiased reading of the above-mentioned Article, it is transparent that the Constitution has provided the freedom to its citizens to profess, practice and propagate their religion, but the right as provided is not absolute and subject to Public Order, Morality and Health. Any act to take the protection of Article 25 of the constitution of India has to satisfy that the act is an “essential religious practice” and should pass through the test of “Doctrine of Essentiality” only then can the act be protected under Article 25 of the Constitution of India and not otherwise.
It is significant to mention herein that the Essential Religious Practice Test was fashioned by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras vs. Sri Laxmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt, enumerating that the freedom of religion as enshrined in the Constitution of India must extend to Religious Practice and should not limited to Religious Belief only and was subject to limitation under the Constitution. It is, therefore, essential to respond to whether the slaughtering of animal Cattle under the name of religion is part and parcel of “Essential Religious Practice” on Eid-Ul-Adha or not.
In the very case of Ratilal Panachand Gandhi vs. State of Bombay (1954), the court held that the right to religion and freedom is subject to certain restrictions mentioned under article 25 of the constitution of India and therefore the doctrine was interpreted in such a manner that it includes not only the beliefs but the acts as well and therefore any practice being conducted under the name of religious belief should be the essential religious practice.
To have a better understanding it is to be remembered that the nation faced the debate on Loudspeakers and the question raised whether Loudspeaker is the “Essential Part of the Religion” or not. It was held in the very case of Maulana Mufti Syed Md Noor Rehman Barkati vs State of West Bengal, 1998 that the use of loudspeaker is not an essential part of Azan itself. Another controversy was awakened in the case of Hijab, whether Hijab is the essential part of the religion then in the very case of Resham and Ors vs. State of Karnataka & Ors held that weaing Hijab is not an Essential Part of the Religion, which have been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Javed Vs. State of Harayana: Polygamy is not an essential practice in Islam and M. Ismail Farooqi vs Union of India: Offering prayers at Babri Mosque is not an essential practice in Islam
It is very significant to mark herein that various courts, in their judgements, including the Hon’ble Apex Court of India in its judgement have held that the slaughter of cows is not an Essential Religious Practice in the Muslim religion. Some of the cases are provided below for the ready reference:
State of West Bengal and Ors Vs. Ashutosh Lahiri and Ors.
Division Bench of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has held in the matter that slaughter of cows by the members of Muslim Community on Bakra Eid was not a requirement of Muslim Religion which was upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Mohd. Hanif Qureshi & Ors vs. State of Bihar and Ors, 1958
The Court held that the slaughtering of cows is not an essential requirement to be practised on Bakra Eid. The Constitutional Bench held that even though Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India granted to all persons the freedom to profess, practice and propagate religion, as the slaughter of cows on Bakra Eid was not an essential religious practice for Muslims, a total ban on cow slaughter on all days including BakrI’d would not be violative of Article 25(1) of Constitution.
Public Order and Morality
It is significant to mark herein that any act should be on Public Order and maintain Morality wherein Morality varies from case to case. It is pertinent to mention herein that every activity of religion cannot be considered Moral, and some activities can eventually turn out to be immoral as well. Under those circumstances, the state has been provided with the authority to impose bans and regulate such activities so that the morals of society can be protected.
State of Bombay Vs. Narasu Appa Mali, 1951
It was held by the Bombay High Court that although Article 25 provides the right to freedom of religion, however, such religious freedom is not an absolute right. It was further observed by the court in the case that the right to freedom of religion is firstly subject to Public order, Morality and Health, and secondly, the rights must be subject to the provisions that are present under Part III of the Constitution.
Therefore, the case of slaughtering animals does not fall under the category of Essential Religious Practice of Islam, and therefore, no act which provides the right to animal cruelty falls under the definition of Morality. It is, therefore, the very merciless act practices in the sign of religious practice is unconstitutional, and a ban should be imposed so as to protect the fundamental rights of the citizens.
Violation of Article 48 of Constitution of India:
Slaughtering of cattle on the BakraI’d is also a violation of the Directive Principle of State Policy provided under Article 48 of the Constitution of India. The Article 48 is provided below for the ready reference:
Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry
The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds and prohibiting the slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.
Article 48 imposed a blanket ban on the slaughter of all categories of cattle and, under the guise of protecting the slaughter of cows, made enactments to facilitate people to slaughter all other castles. It is further submitted that the objective of Article 48 is to see that no cattle should be slaughtered even after they cease to be useful or milch or draught. It is pertinent to mention herein that if any act of slaughtering of the animal under the garb of Religion on Bakra Eid violates Article 48 and the state fails to impose restrictions on it, then it becomes the duty of the Court to interpret it and do justice to the animal world. It is, therefore, that Fundamental Rights must be read in the light of the Directive Principles of State Policy, and therefore, the slaughtering of animals is a violation of Article 48 of the Constitution of India.
Violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India
Protection of life and personal liberty
No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
It is very pertinent to understand that Article 21 of the Constitution is applicable on every living creature and therefore applicable on animals too. Upholding the rights of the animals under article 21, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India said that subject to law of the land, all and every species own the right to life and security.
N.R. Nair Vs. Union of India
The Hon’ble Kerala court held that the walls between humans and non-humans should be shattered, considering the granting of fundamental rights to animals, and highlighted that legal rights should be extended beyond people, not remaining in the exclusive domain of human beings.
Prevention of Cruelty Act 1960
The Act serves as the basis for protecting animals in India. It states that for any animal subject to unnecessary pain or trauma, the owner of the animal will be fined or imprisoned for a fixed period. It has been covered under Section 11 of the Act of 1960 (Treating Animals with Cruelty), which is a punishable act under the Law.
It is, therefore, can be seen and articulated that no animal slaughter is anywhere an essential religious practice and if any, then it is a violation of the Constitution of India. The Hon’ble Courts also held that Article 25 should not violate public order and morality and, therefore, the act of slaughtering cattle in the garb of religion on Bakr Eid should be intervened by the State, and a ban shall be imposed so that no animal can be slaughtered the merciless act be celebrated in the Secular nation.
Comments