Note on Laws that have been implemented in multiple states of the country which bans

cow slaughter. Analysis as to whether the laws need to be amended to make it more
effective or whether they should be abolished?

It is essential to understand the history and social position as to cow and cow slaughter before
we analyze the cow slaughter laws in different states and either affirm its validity or deny it.
Cow happens to be a sacred animal for the Hindu community as a whole, however interestingly
cow worship is restricted to certain communities and states, this was also observed by mahatma
Gandhi in his article in Harijan in august 1947, he stated that religious worship of cow is limited
and largely confined to the region of United Province of Bihar (Now Bihar and Odisha),
Marwar (now a part of Rajasthan) and Gujarat. The debate for cow slaughter ban existed even
before the independence but no legislative actions were taken for the same considering the non-
interference in religious matter mandate of the British empire in India. However post-
independence many groups and individuals, upon the formation of the constituent assembly
which was also the interim parliament, started writing letters to Nehru and Vallabh bhai,
seeking a complete ban on cow slaughter and advocated its inclusion as fundamental right
under part III of the constitution however after due consideration of two contradictory opinions
upon the same, it was finally included under Part IV of the constitution which consists of the
directive principles of the state policy. Art 48 of the constitution reads as follows. “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.”

I will emphasize upon the common belief and reasoning behind Hindu worship of cows and
its belief of sacredness, as observed by devdutt Patnaik in his book devlok, India was primarily
an agriculture economy and thus cattle especially bullock and cows were of utmost importance,
the economy and the food cycle of ancient India primarily depended upon the agriculture
produces and dairy produces from cattle, and thus this animals were a catalyst of prospering
economy, an attempt to save them was made by associating them with religion and claiming
them to be praise worthy, Cows particularly were used for dairy products, tilling, manure for
farming and many other uses. The term Kamdhenu (the wish fulfilling cow) was thus a
symbolic denotation for this multi capability characteristic of cows.
Now let us visit the legal provision as to beef ban. In India laws are made subjected to entries
in schedule seven of the constitution, by the virtue of entry 15 of the state list, and entry 17 of
the concurrent list, the state and the center as well as state has the power to make laws
pertaining to slaughter, however the ambit under entry 15 of the state list is wider in contrast
to entry 17 of the concurrent list, entry 15 reads as, “Preservation, protection and improvement
of stock (here stock means livestock and animal stock, following the principle of ejusdem
generis) and prevention of animal diseases; veterinary training and practice” Whilst entry 17 of
the concurrent list reads as, “ Prevention of cruelty to animals”. Whilst the states have the
power to make laws for both preservation, protection and improvement, the unions scope of
legislation is limited to cruelty prevention of animals, and thus differential laws in distinct
states exist in India. A first proposed reformation of law is widening the scope of entry 17 of
the concurrent list by inclusion of preservation and promotion of animal and love stocks along
with the existing provision of prevention from cruelty.

Currently, every state has a law banning cow and bullock slaughter except for the states of,
Kerala, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Sikkim, Tripura, Manipur, and Mizoram.
While west Bengal partially allows it, others strictly ban it, with punishment and its gravity
differing from state to state. Whilst most provisions are common, some states provide for
slaughtering of cows and other cattle ejusdem generis after a specific age with state permission,
this is clearly not the constitutional objective under Art 48, the provisions under the constitution
separately and specifically mentions cows and calves apart from milch and draught animals,
thus this provisions as to fit for slaughter certificate and slaughter after a specific age must be
abolished since it clearly defies the constitutional objective and it is an established principle of
law that a legislative objective cannot go beyond the constitutional objective and mandate and
must function only within the limitation drawn by the constitution. States like west bengal
under S.4 of the west Bengal animal laughter control act, 1950, Tamil Nadu under S.4 of the
Tamil Nadu Animal Preservation Act, 1958, Pondicherry under S.3 of the Pondicherry
prevention of cow slaughter act, 1968, Orissa under S.3 of The Orrisa Prevention of Cow
Slaughter Act 1960, Maharashtra Under S.6 of the Maharashtra Animal Prevention Act,
Karnataka under S.5(1) of the Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation
Act, 1964, and other states like Andhra Pradesh, Assam, and Bihar allow slaughter of cows and
bullocks after a specific age when they are rendered useless, it is proposed to amend this
provision and eliminate the provisions for certification for killing and slaughter, since it is not
in consonance with the directive principles of state policy, it is well known fact that DPSP’s
are not enforceable in the law courts but they are enforceable in the legislature by the presiding
officers of the legislative assemblies and the parliament, and thus by the virtue of the same, this
must be eliminated. However, there are a few reservations that might be provided, firstly, many
of the states are leading producers and exporters of leather and contribute to the economy in a
substantial amount, interestingly the minority community largely runs this trade, thus
provisions and reservations to allow slaughtering in such area in consonance with religious
sentiments and rights of the majority community is also proposed, wherein it is submitted that,
the slaughter in such cases must be only of the male animals, i.e. bullocks and that too after a
specific age, this shall be a harmonious solution for both the communities as well as the
economy and shall promote peace and healthy co-existence.

Another important provision under the cow slaughter laws of many states is the ban on
transportation of animals intended for slaughter, this is an important and interesting policy
decision since it curbs the slaughter trade from its very root and source. States like,
Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat have this provision in their laws and
the opposition claims these provisions to be the primary cause behind increasing lynching
cases. Thus, it is a situation where good law has bad results, the solution to such a legal dilemma
lies not in substantive law but in procedural law, since it is the process that makes it bad. The
solution to the same lies in an existing law introduced in India on 1st April 2018, popularly
known as the E-way bill. Although this law is applicable only to taxable goods above the value
of ₹ 50,000, it can be exploited and utilised by mapping a provision for cattle transportation,
by creating a special cattle category, since the portal maintains a record as to the receiver and
the place of receiving, this shall help in determining whether they are being transported for
slaughtering or otherwise, this shall not only eliminate cow slaughter up to a substantive extent,
but shall also prevent lynching. It is submitted that an amicable solution is available in the
existing laws and it is only integration of laws that is needed with a few minor amendments to
a few provisions.

Before concluding, I will like to also highlight upon the allegations made by a few groups,
claiming violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution, by the introduction
of cow protection legislations, the rights contested to be violated are rights under Art 25, Art
19 (1) (g). I will first like to highlight the legality around Art 25 and present my argument and
legal analogy around it, it is contended by various parties that consumption of cow meat (beef),
is a part of their religion and a ban on the consumption is violation under Art 25 which
guarantees religious freedom, it is submitted that Art 25 gives religious freedoms subject to
public order, morality, health, and other provisions of part 3 of the constitution. Consumption
of cow meat even for religious purpose if creates public disorder owing to hurting of religious
sentiments of some other group, such freedom cannot be permissible under the law, since it is
an establish principle of law that exercising of right must not infringe the rights of others.
Moreover upon the factual grounds I contend that consumption of beef is not an essential part
of the Islamic culture, a hadith from Ibn Mas Ud, states that Mohammad said, “Use the milk
and fat of the cow and avoid its flesh, for indeed its milk and fat are a medicine and its flesh is
a disease.”1 Moreover a recent report from the United Nations establishes the fact that meat
consumption contributes 40% to the global warming and nations must establish a mechanism
to minimize meat consumption. Moreover Art 25, gives rights subject to two important factor
health and other provisions of part 3, Right to a healthy and safe environment is a fundamental
right under Art 212, thus art 21 r/w art 25 and the report of the united nations it is the duty of
the state to reduce meat consumption, thus the laws stands.

Further it is contested that even Art 19 (1) (g) is not violated by the laws, since Art 19(6)
specifically provides for reasonable restriction on trade and commerce considering public
health and safety and public order. The only issue with the trade of cow slaughter was the
impact on leather industry policy suggestion for which has already been laid above.

I conclude with the stand that the existing laws on cow slaughter across different states are
correct and in line with the constitution, they need minor amendments as to certain provisions
and procedures, the recommendation for which has been laid above.

1
Mustadrak al-Hâkim
2
MC Mehta V Union of India