Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Union of India informed the Delhi High Court on Tuesday that the amendment bill concerning animal cruelty laws has undergone public consultation and is currently under thorough examination.

The Ministry of Law and Justice has received approximately 7,000 suggestions and 1,20,000 representations, indicating that the review process will require additional time.

Acknowledging this, the bench, consisting of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna, has scheduled the matter for further consideration on March 13, 2024.

The petitioners, namely Kapil Dev, his wife Romi Dev, and animal rights activist Anjali Gopalan, have moved the High Court through Advocates Shraddha Deshmukh, Nikhil Singhvi, Shikhar Kishore, Bilal Ikram, Parth Aggarwal, and Milind Raj Dixit.

The plea has been filed on account of repeated instances of barbaric treatment meted out to animals, showing the “most brutal and cruel face of humanity” and the “utter effete” response of law and the law-enforcing agencies.

Notably, the cricketer had approached the Apex Court in November 2022, in the backdrop of a shocking incident of a stray pregnant dog being tortured and killed in Delhi. However, in July 2023, the court asked the petitioner to move to the Delhi High Court while allowing him to withdraw his writ petition.

"The provisions of the IPC remain unavailable for protection of rights of animals against grave offences such as maiming or killing, especially when such a valuation is not possible, and in cases where the animal is a street animal and not a pet, or where the animal is handicapped or has been rendered unprofitable due to old age," the plea stated.

The petitioners, in the present plea, have challenged Section 11 of the PCA Act, stating that it was “without deterrence” and manifestly “arbitrary” since it trivialises life and denies animals any meaningful existence by treating their mutilation and killing as petty and frivolous acts, mocking their death through the imposition of punishment of less than Rs 10.

“Section 11 is further unfair and unreasonable in so far as the exception under PCA Act permits cruelty to animals for the purposes mentioned in Section 11(3) (b) (destruction of stray dogs in lethal chambers), Section 11(3)(c) (extermination or destruction of any animal under the authority of any law for the time being in force)...,” the plea read.

The plea also challenged Sections 428 (Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees) and 429 (mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees) of the Indian Penal Code claiming that it is an instance of speciesism suggesting lack of moral worth or value in animals.

Further, the plea stated that the said sections of the IPC are further “unfair, unreasonable and arbitrary” as the same allow for treating animals as property and morally less important than humans, and since the same have an inbuilt attitude of prejudice and therefore creates an arbitrary classification thus being hit by unreasonableness.

“The provisions of IPC remain unavailable for protection of rights of animals against grave offences such as maiming or killing, especially when such a valuation is not possible, and in cases where the animal is a street animal and not a pet or where the animal is handicapped or has been rendered unprofitable due to old age”, the plea added.

Case Title: Kapil Dev & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.