Introduction:
India is one of the countries prominently known for its magnificent and far-reaching diversity of unique Flora & Fauna,
If we compare India with the other countries and see some of the statistics, India with 102,718 species of fauna, and 23.39% of the nation's geographical area under forest and tree cover in 2020, is the world's Eighth most biodiverse region.
By putting these records, surely India can be classified as a country where Fauna is treated with much respect, dignity and security, but here comes the catch: with time these records have also seen a big downfall.
However, according to a report released by the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organizations (FIAPO) and All Creatures Great and Small (ACGS), a total of 4,93,910 animals were involved in various crimes by Humans in the last decade.
The report details 720 crimes committed against Street Animals, 741 crimes committed against working animals, 588 crimes committed against companion animals, 88 crimes committed against agricultural animals, and 258 crimes committed against wild animals and birds. There were approximately 1,000 assault cases documented, including 82 cases of sexual abuse, 266 cases of cold-blooded murder, and over 400 cases of violent attacks involving beating, kicking, torturing, throwing acid or boiling water, maiming a part of the body, and attacking with a knife or a blunt object.
To protect the Non-Human fora, there were several laws such as The Wildlife Protection Act of 1972, and the Sections 428 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, none of them specifically addressed the cruelty factor by humans, which finally gave rise to the need of specific legislation to protect them and prosecute the offenders. In 1960, The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act was rolled out from the Parliament.
While in 2022, several legislations have received amendments to bolster their functioning, the PCA Act seems to have been left in the dust which ultimately forces us to think whether the Act has stood the test of time or is rendered obsolete due to time and lack of Legislative will?
Provisions Of The PCA Act And Its Potency:
As mentioned above, the Act was passed with the main goal of preventing undue pain or suffering on animals, such as the occurrences detailed in the AIPO report.
The Act, in its attempt to prevent cruelty by Humans, defined various terms such as 'Animal’, 'Captive Animal', 'Domestic Animal', 'Board', and other appropriate terms mentioned in the act.
The Section 2 of the Act contains such definitions and defines an ‘Animal’ as:
- "any living creature other than a human being"
Further, the section goes forward defining what is a ‘captive animal’ and how it differs in meaning and interpretation from a Domestic Animal as the legislation’s nomenclature is wholly applicable to both.
As there are numerous ways in which an animal could be tortured, Section – 11 was specifically added to list all the possible ways. Some of which are:
- If any person—
(a) beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering or causes or, being the owner permits, any animals to be so treated; or
(b) employs in any work or labour or for any purpose any animal which, by reason of its age or any disease], infirmity, wound, sore or other cause, is unfit to be so employed or, being the owner, permits any such unfit animal to be so employed; or
(c) wilfully and unreasonably administers any injurious drug or injurious substance to [any animal] or wilfully and unreasonably causes or attempts to cause any such drug or substance to be taken by any animal
Further, the Act entails several other sub-sections from (a) to (o) to explain what behaviour is Cruel and what is not.
Later, Section-11(1) received an amendment in 1982 which added how an offender will be punished if he is found guilty of any of the sub-clauses of Section-11(1)(a to o). Additionally, the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) was also established by the Act to promote animal welfare and protect animals from maltreatment. The Board's major purpose was to keep the law in place in India and to take necessary efforts to enhance the welfare of animals.
Loose Rope over Enforcement:
While the Act explained and categorized Cruelty and the related provision aptly, one of the Sections which causes a gap between the desired objectives and the ground reality is Section 11(3), which details what is exempted from cruelty.
The acts such as ‘dehorning’, ‘branding’, ‘nose-roping 'and Extermination of Animals in Slaughterhouses have been exempted from cruelty. So, this means that an animal which is slaughtered, nose-tied or used as a weight loader is not considered as cruelty. While these exceptions must have been well thought of, the ground reality is extremely distorted.
In our everyday lives, we can see Animals abandoned by their owners once they are no longer financially viable for them, the Municipal Department taking away stray dogs for extermination, sterilization of animals, one can not deny the fact that it does not inflict any mental agony on any of these animals.
Also, in rural areas, the tradition of Rooster-Fighting is prevalent, where two animals belonging to the same species are pitted against one another in a deathmatch sort of fashion. It counts as cruelty, yet this malpractice is widespread across the country.
In South-India, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act of 2017 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Conduct of Jallikattu) Rules of 2017 made it legal to continue the popular bull-taming sport named as ‘Jallikattu’ under the guise of tradition, even after the Supreme Court of India declared it to be cruel to bulls in 2014. Hence, wasting the time and efforts of both Courts and Litigants, as there was an uproar to continue this dangerous yet cruel hunting game.
Moreover, the biggest Flaw is the amount of Fine the Act imposes for any of the offences from (a) to (o) of the Section 11.
- “If any person commits any of the acts mentioned from (a) to (o), he shall be punishable in the case of a first offence, with fine which shall not be less than ten rupees but which may extend to fifty rupees, and in the case of a second or subsequent offence … fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees but which may extend to one hundred rupees or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with both.”
The major loophole which needs an immediate action is that the amount of fine or compensation that is imposed on any offence under PCA Act is very low. The amount of fine that ranges between Rs. 10 and Rs. 50 can not prevent the cruelty towards animals.
A Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) is required to be established in every state under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act of 1956, however except from a few states, there are none in the rest of the nation.
Conclusion & Way Forward:
To properly establish a strong foundation for animal legislation in India, there is still a long way to go. Even the Indian Constitution's provisions for animal protection are still regarded as principles rather than as binding legislation.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act of 1960's penalties for animal cruelty are just not severe enough to effectively prevent crimes against animals. The law is not strictly enforced, and it has a number of clauses that give room for culpability to be avoided. Even as the Act was amended and renamed more than a decade ago, the atrocities continued and rendered the Act impotent.. Even after persistent efforts by activists and NGOs, several thousands of Animals are wiped out ruthlessly. In order to give India a stronger animal protection law, extensive revisions must be made. It must be understood that even if once the Act gets amended, its real success is observed on the Ground level.
This Article was authored by Harsh Dabas and Ketan Aggarwal, currently law students of University School of Law and Legal Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University respectively.
Comments