Order limited to Mumbai
Order limited to Mumbai
In a relief for traders selling meat and poultry, the Bombay high court on Monday stayed the controversial ban on sale of meat in Mumbai on September 17. The municipal corporation, in view of the Jain community’s fasting season Paryushan, had imposed a ban on the sale of meat and a meat-seller’s body had subsequently challenged the decision in court.
A division bench of Justices Anoop V. Mohta and Amjad Sayyed, while granting a stay on the ban on sale of meat, raised the question as to why the restriction is only on mutton and chicken and not on fish and eggs. “If it is a question of the practice of non-violence by the Jain community, then why have only mutton and chicken been included in the ban and not fish and eggs ” the court asked.
The high court, however, refused to intervene on the issue of the ban on slaughter and closure of abattoirs on the day in question and made it clear that the stay will be limited to Mumbai alone, though a similar measure has been imposed in the adjoining Mira-Bhayander and Navi Mumbai towns.
The ban has become an issue that has kicked up a political storm, with questions being raised on intrusion into eating habits of people. When the matter reached the court, the BMC changed its stance and informed the court that it had lifted the two-day ban imposed by it. However, there was an additional two-day ban from the state government and the court was supposed to decide on this on Monday.
The court, while staying the ban on sale of meat, also questioned as to why the Jain community wants to practice non-violence only on some days. “You (Jains) do not have a problem if slaughter of animals is done on some days. If ahimsa (non-violence) is on your mind, then why this alternate day permission ” the court asked. “We are only going by the law and not dealing with this matter via sentiments and political things,” the judges observed while hearing the matter. The bench further observed that although the circular was of 2004, we are very clear that the BMC never fully implemented the ban on sale of meat. It never insisted on this (ban on sale of meat), but only insisted on closure of abattoirs. The bench in its order also noted that that though the Maharashtra government had issued a circular as back as in 2004 banning meat sale for two days it was never implemented “in its true sense.” The court also observed that there had been inconsistency in the stands of BMC and the state government. The state government had on September 7, 2004, issued a circular stating that for two days during the ‘Paryushan’ festival there will be closure of abattoirs and ban on slaughter and sale of meat. The bench also said the government should inform public in advance about such decisions. “At the eleventh hour people come to know and it creates complications. Sudden imposition, especially on eating habits is not correct.” The court, while admitting the petition, said it was going to frame certain issues that will have to be considered during final hearing of the matter. The issues include whether a mere representation of a religious group practising vegetarianism is sufficient to declare ban on sale of meat and closure of abattoirs, whether before declaring such bans opportunity and hearing needs to be given to concerned parties, whether such action amounts to discrimination between religions and whether sentiments of a particular community practising non-violence can be restricted only to slaughter of meat and not to fish and eggs. The court will also consider if such a ban is correct in a metropolitan or cosmopolitan city and if it amounts to violation of the fundamental rights of people and if one religion can be given preference over others. The court posted the petition for final hearing after four weeks.
