Supreme Court allows bull races in Maharashtra after four years

Maharashtra is set to see a bull run of a different kind, with the Supreme Court today allowing bull races in the State after a four-year hiatus, subject to conditions. .A Bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and CT Ravikumar permitted the resumption of bull races in Maharashtra on the same conditions and regulations as laid down in the amendments to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA Act) by Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.A challenge to the validity of those amendments is pending before a Constitution Bench of the top court since 2018. The Court today said that the validity of the Maharashtra amendment will also be decided by the same Constitution Bench..The apex court had in 2014 banned Jallikattu, bull races and bullock-cart races across the country, holding that these practices violated provisions of the PCA Act. Karnataka and Tamil Nadu had subsequently amended the Act to allow regulated bull races and Jallikattu.The Constitution Bench will examine and adjudicate on the following five questions with respect to the amendments:i. Is the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act referable, in pith and substance, to Entry 17, List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, or does it further and perpetuate cruelty to animals; and can it, therefore, be said to be a measure of prevention of cruelty to animals? Is it colourable legislation which does not relate to any Entry in the State List or Entry 17 of the Concurrent List?ii. The Tamil Nadu Amendment Act states that it is to preserve the cultural heritage of the State of Tamil Nadu. Can the impugned Tamil Nadu Amendment Act be stated to be part of the cultural heritage of the people of the State of Tamil Nadu so as to receive the protection of Article 29 of the Constitution of India?iii. Is the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act, in pith and substance, to ensure the survival and well-being of the native breed of bulls? Is the Act, in pith and substance, relatable to Article 48 of the Constitution of India?iv. Does the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act go contrary to Articles 51A(g) and 51A(h), and could it be said, therefore, to be unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India?v. Is the impugned Tamil Nadu Amendment Act directly contrary to the judgment in A. Nagaraja (supra), and the review judgment dated 16th November, 2016 in the aforesaid case, and whether the defects pointed out in the aforesaid two judgments could be said to have been overcome by the Tamil Nadu Legislature by enacting the impugned Tamil Nadu Amendment Act?Senior Advocate and former Attorney General for India Mukul Rohatgi appeared for the State of Maharashtra on Thursday..Read our coverage of the challenges to the practice of Jallikattu here..[Read a live account of today's hearing].#Jallikattu: Challenge to TN Amendments to PCA Act will be heard by Constitution Bench of Supreme Court