People Abandon Cattle On Roads, But Feel Offended If They Are Used For Food : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday remarked on what it described as a contradiction in society's treatment of cattle, observing that while people often abandon animals after their economic utility diminishes and allow them to roam freely on roads without concern for their safety, they simultaneously take deep offence if those animals are used for food. The Court made the observation while examining the larger issue of stray cattle-related accidents and suggesting measures for the Centre and State Governments to address the problem.

A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice N Kotiswar Singh observed that owners who choose to rear animals should ideally care for them throughout their lives.

"We have already touched upon the issue of animals being let go as their utility dwindled.In a perfect world, this would not be the case. All those who have chosen to bring an animal home shall see to it that they are looked after for their whole life. But the reality is that we live in a deeply flawed, human world," the Bench said.

Highlighting a societal contradiction, the Court added:

"Perhaps it is a feature of this flawed world that, on the one end, we let them roam about without caring for their safety, and, on the other, find it deeply offensive if an individual uses them to secure a full stomach for himself or his family."

The Court clarified that "there is a clear distinction between pets and other animals" and observed that most cattle found wandering on roads and highways are animals reared for a specific economic purpose. Once that purpose is achieved, or their productivity declines, they are often abandoned.

The Bench acknowledged that many farmers and dairy owners lack the financial means to maintain animals after they cease to be productive. However, it said abandoning them cannot be the solution and suggested that owners who decide to part with such animals should be responsible for ensuring their safe transfer to authorised shelters.

The judgment also noted that 24 States have laws against cattle slaughter but the provisions regarding their protection are not implemented properly.

The observations came in a judgment arising out of a compensation claim filed by the widow of a man who died after being attacked by a stray bull in Sangrur, Punjab, in 2007. While allowing the appeal and awarding the widow ₹15 lakh as compensation, the Court expanded the discussion to the broader issue of stray cattle and the dangers they pose on public roads.

Describing bovine-related accidents as a growing public safety concern, the Court observed that such incidents are "not few and far between" and remarked that cattle are "not meant to be natural speed breakers, placed willy-nilly on the National Highways, roads and streets." Referring to official data, it noted that more than 1,300 people lost their lives annually in recent years due to animal-related incidents.

To address the issue, the Court recommended that States ensure effective implementation of existing cattle protection laws, create a mechanism to compensate victims of stray cattle accidents, mandate tagging of cattle, hold owners accountable for safely transferring abandoned animals to shelters, and appoint nodal officers to oversee tagging, digital records and the functioning of animal shelters.

The Court directed that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories for consideration of its recommendations.

Also from the judgment -Supreme Court Flags Stray Cattle Menace On Roads, Says States Must Compensate Victims

Headnote

Constitution of India — Article 226 — Maintainability of Writ Petition — Disputed Questions of Fact — Efflux of Time & Remediless Claimants - Where a writ petition challenging non-payment of compensation for injuries/death caused by stray cattle was filed in 2010 and remitted after 15 years, the High Court's Division Bench erred in setting aside the Single Judge's award solely on the ground of “disputed questions of fact” and relegating the claimants to a Civil Court - The Supreme Court held that after such an extraordinary efflux of time, relegating the claimants to a civil suit would leave them completely remediless - On this short ground alone— i.e., the passage of time—the impugned High Court judgment warranted interference and adjudication on merits in the interest of justice.

Constitution of India — Articles 48 & 51-A(g) — Animal Welfare — Stray Cattle Menace & Compassion for Living Creatures - Directive Principles of State Policy (Article 48) impose a duty on the State to organize agriculture/animal husbandry and prevent cattle slaughter - Under Article 51-A(g), it is the fundamental duty of every citizen to have compassion for living creatures, which in its wider fold embraces cattle spoken of in Article 48 - Stray cattle roaming on public roads cause severe accidents leading to human casualties and unnecessary pain and suffering to animals. [Relied on State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat, (2005) 8 SCC 534; Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of India, (2023) 9 SCC 322; Mohd. Hanif Quareshi v. State of Bihar, 1958 SCC OnLine SC 176; Paras 11-16]

Compensation — Stray Cattle Attack/Accidents — Quantum Determination & Pre 2020 Ambiguity - While the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 principles cannot be applied as a universal rule in every non-vehicular stray animal accident case, claimants facing pre-2020 incidents (prior to quantified statutory schemes like the Punjab Bye-Laws, 2020/2023) are entitled to an equitable lump-sum compensation evaluated on the specific attending facts of the case - Considering the prolonged litigation and severe injuries sustained, the Supreme Court awarded a lump sum compensation of ₹15,000,000 (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) to the appellant. [Para 21-25]

Directives / Guidelines Issued to Centre and States on Stray Bovines - Implementation of Laws - All States must strictly implement their respective cattle preservation, protection, and stray control statutes in letter and spirit - Compensation Mechanism - Centre and States/UTs are advised to frame rules or enact necessary amendments to establish a clear mechanism for awarding compensation in accidents caused by bovines/cattle (covering both pedestrian and vehicular accidents) - Mandatory Tagging: Tagging of all animals must be mandated with a 12-digit code to enable digital tracking, link to health/vaccination records, and identify owners who abandon them - Regulated Abandonment / Safe Transfer - Owners choosing to let go of cattle after their economic utility diminishes must ensure safe transfer to recognized shelters/gaushalas, accompanied by an official receipt and database updates - Nodal Officers - Corporations/Departments must depute dedicated Nodal Officers to oversee tagging, digitization of records, and smooth operation of animal shelters. [Paras 19 - 26]