To,

DD No. 58 A

June 10, 2016.

1. SHO, Police Station,

Prashant Vihar, Rohini, Delhi.
2. Resident Commissioner of Bihar, New Delhi.
3. Deputy Secretary to Animal Welfare Division, MoEF, New Delhi.
4. Honble Speaker, Lok Sabha, New Delhi.
5. Honble Secretary General to Rajya Sabha, New Delhi.
6. Honble Chairman, Committee on Petitions, Rajya Sabha, New Delhi.
Subject: Zero FIR against shooters of blue bulls in Bihar along with the concerned officials,
who allowed them for mass culling, for the violation of the Indian Arms Act, IPC 295-A,
428, 429, 120-B read with the section 3, 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act,
1960.
Greetings,
Kindly refer to the mass culling of blue bulls in Bihar, using unscientific methods of
eliminating this wild animals, spoiling food chain, bypassing the orders passed by the
Honble Supreme Court of India, upholding animal rights, as defined under section 3 of the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, by the custodian of these wild animals, as
described under section 39 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, whereas these private
shooters are obtained the license of arms for their self defense instead of committed crime,
because arms cant be obtained for mass culling of wild animals, by a private person, no
doubt Govt. of India have power and Authority, as described under section 62 of the
Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 to declare wild animals as vermin but declaration of wild
animal as vermin doesnt mean to eliminate like this without adopting scientific methods,
besides it Hindu community worship gai and mass culling of neelgai, hurt the sentiments,
feelings and religious believers of Hindu community. Please find attached here with the
reply given by the office of the DFO, Gaya vide letter No. 1931 dated March 15, 2016, in
continuation with my grievance bearing No. GOVBH/E/2016/00164, which is reproduced
below and said letter confirmed that humane methods, like Rehabilitation and
Introduction of animal birth control scheme were never opted by the Govt. of Bihar,
besides it Govt. of Bihar doesnt have the actual figure of surplus census of blue bull area
wise and no advice was obtained from the Wildlife Institute of India, likewise private

person cant use telescope on their weapon, in fact Govt. of India circulated the guidelines,
to control man animal conflict and never allowed Govt. of Bihar to shoot the wild animals,
while declaring neelgai as vermin. It would also be pertinent to mention here that animal is
a state subject and it is the responsibility of Govt. of Bihar, to be humane towards wild
animals:
Status as on 10 Jun 2016
Registration
Number
Name Of
Complainant
Date of
Receipt
Received by
Forwarded to
Contact
Address

Grievance
Description

: GOVBH/E/2016/00164
: Naresh Kadyan
: 05 Feb 2016
: Government of Bihar
: DMDAYA
: DM GAYA, BIHAR
Media reports from Gaya: Blue bulls, commonly known as nilgai, have
caused extensive damage to standing rabi crops in several blocks of the
district. Kharif crops were badly affected on account of rain deficit and
now the blue bull (nil gai) menace has added to the woes of farmers.
According to reports reaching the district headquarters, hordes of blue
bulls have invaded rabi crop fields and large chunks of land have virtually
been made barren by the rampaging blue bulls. Amas, Gurua, Paraiya,
Konch and Belaganj areas are the worst affected blocks of the district.
Elsewhere too, the blue bulls have caused extensive damage. Asked about
the extent of damage caused by the rampaging blue bulls, district
agriculture officer (DAO) Sudama Mahto said though no official estimate
has been made, extensive damage has been caused in several parts of the
district. "Blue bulls, in the past too had been a menace in the district and
: this is not the first time that the menace has surfaced. Though the ban on
the killing of blue bulls has been lifted in the larger interest of the farmers,
it continues to be an emotive issue and as such a large scale killing of blue
bulls is not pragmatic," he said. Conceding blue bulls to be a menace, DM
Kumar Ravi said, "sub-divisional officers have been authorised to permit
the killing of blue bulls in areas where the blue bulls ran amok."
According to Gaya Sadar SDO VK Jaiswal, he has received an application
for permitting the killing of rampaging blue bulls from the Chandauti
block area."I have forwarded the petition to the block and forest officials
for comment after which a decision will be taken, once report from the
block and forest officials come," said the SDO. Farmers of the district also
want the government to compensate the loss caused to standing crop by
the blue bulls."A couple of years back blue bulls sneaked into the airport
area and moved around the runway causing disruption to air services. The

airport is spread over an area of 900 acres of land and officials had great
difficulty in driving out the blue bulls. Now effective steps have been taken
to prevent the re-entry of blue bulls in the airport area," said airport
director Dilip Kumar. Besides blue bulls, a group of wild tuskers too have
caused panic in parts of the district. Driven out from neighbouring
Aurangabad district, the tuskers entered Guraru area of the district. The
tuskers injured two villagers on Wednesday. According to the DM, forest
officials have succeeded in chasing the tuskers out of the district
boundary. "Villagers have been advised not to indulge in acts that
provoke the tuskers," said the DM. Animal Welfare Party with OIPA in
India in the opinion that: Culling of blue bulls under permit is not a
solution, which is against the verdict passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India, upholding animal rights, as per section 3 of the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, besides it article 51 A (g) of Indian
Constitution, defined the fundamental duties of every citizen, as per
section 39 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, blue bulls are Govt. of
Bihar property and concerned officer have no Authority to issue permit
for mass culling of these animals, whereas Arms license also given to the
public for self defense not to cull wild animals, hence we demands
immediate rescue of these blue bulls for further rehabilitation in the
Infirmaries and further introduction of animal birth control scheme for
these animals, deleting from the protection cover of the Act concerned.
Current
: CASE CLOSED
Status
Date of Action : 18 Mar 2016

Hence, mass culling like this adopting unscientific and cruel methods, clear cut violation of
the Indian Arms Act, IPC 295-A, 428, 429, 120-B read with the section 3, 11 of the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
Whereas Ministry of Home Affairs issued advisory, which is attached here with that if an
offense in cognizable in legal nature, committed by anyone, anywhere in India then Zero
FIR can be lodged, hence Zero FIR may kindly be lodged against the shooters along with
others, for the violation of above said different sections, rescuing all blue bulls in distress in
Bihar, confiscating the weapons misused in said crime and shooters Arms license may
kindly be cancelled at once.
It is further submitting that Honble Chief Justice, Supreme Court of India along with the
Honble Chairman, Committee on Petitions, Rajya Sabha may kindly treated this
complaint as public Interest litigation and section 62 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972
may kindly be omitted, being unconstitutional, violation of human rights a well, keeping in
view the Judgment passed by the court of law, upholding animal rights and 5 liberties,
which are reproduced below:

Extracts of some Paras of Supreme Court order dated 7.5.2014 in SLP (C) No.11686 of
2007 :
Para 77: We, therefore, hold that AWBI is right in its stand that Jallikattu, Bullock-cart
Race and such events per se violate Sections 3, 11(1)(a) and 11(1)(m)(ii) of PCA Act
and hence we uphold the notification dated 11.7.2011 issued by the Central
Government, consequently, Bulls cannot be used as performing animals, either for the
Jallikattu events or Bullock-cart Races in the State of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra or
elsewhere in the country. We, therefore, make the following declarations and
directions:
(1) We declare that the rights guaranteed to the Bulls under Sections 3 and 11 of PCA
Act read with Articles 51A(g) & (h) are cannot be taken away or curtailed, except
under Sections 11(3) and 28 of PCA Act.
(2) We declare that the five freedoms, referred to earlier be read into Sections 3 and 11
of PCA Act, be protected and safeguarded by the States, Central Government, Union
Territories (in short Governments), MoEF and AWBI.
(3) AWBI and Governments are directed to take appropriate steps to see that the
persons-in-charge or care of animals, take reasonable measures to ensure the wellbeing of animals.
(4) AWBI and Governments are directed to take steps to prevent the infliction of
unnecessary pain or suffering on the animals, since their rights have been statutorily
protected under Sections 3 and 11 of PCA Act.
(5) AWBI is also directed to ensure that the provisions of Section 11(1)(m)(ii)
scrupulously followed, meaning thereby, that the person-in-charge or care of the
animal shall not incite any animal to fight against a human being or another animal.
(6) AWBI and the Governments would also see that even in cases where Section 11(3)
is involved, the animals be not put to unnecessary pain and suffering and adequate
and scientific methods be adopted to achieve the same.

(7) AWBI and the Governments should take steps to impart education in relation to
human treatment of animals in accordance with Section 9(k) inculcating the spirit of
Articles 51A(g) & (h) of the Constitution.
(8) Parliament is expected to make proper amendment of the PCA Act to provide an
effective deterrent to achieve the object and purpose of the Act and for violation of
Section 11, adequate penalties and punishments should be imposed.
(9) Parliament, it is expected, would elevate rights of animals to that of constitutional
rights, as done by many of the countries around the world, so as to protect their dignity
and honour.
(10) The Governments would see that if the provisions of the PCA Act and the
declarations and the directions issued by this Court are not properly and effectively
complied with, disciplinary action be taken against the erring officials so that the
purpose and object of PCA Act could be achieved.
(11) TNRJ Act is found repugnant to PCA Act, which is a welfare legislation, hence
held constitutionally void, being violative of Article 254(1) of the Constitution of India.
(12) AWBI is directed to take effective and speedy steps to implement the provisions of
PCA Act in consultation with SPCA and make periodical reports to the Governments
and if any violation is noticed, the Governments should take steps to remedy the same,
including appropriate follow-up action.
Sincerely yours,

Naresh Kadyan,
Convener, Animal Welfare Party,
Representative of OIPA in India,
Master Trainer, Animal Welfare Board of India,
C-38, Rose Apartment, Prashant Vihar, sector-14,
Rohini, Delhi 110085.
Mobile: 9813010595.