http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 8

PETITIONER:

HAJI USMANBHAI HASANBHAI QURESHI & ORS.

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

STATE OF GUJARAT

DATE OF JUDGMENT17/04/1986

BENCH:

MISRA, R.B. (J)

BENCH:

MISRA, R.B. (J)

REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J)

VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)

ERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J)

KHALID, V. (J)

CITATION:

1986 AIR 1213 1986 SCR (2) 719

1986 SCC (3) 12 1986 SCALE (1)537

ACT:

Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954 - S. 5 - Sub-s.

(1A), cls. (c) & (d)/sub-s. (2) - Ban on slaughter of bulls

and bullocks below the age of sixteen years - Whether

imposes an unreasonable restriction on fundamental right to

carry on trade or profession - Whether discriminatory.

Constitution of India, Arts. 14, 19 & 48 - Ban on

slaughter of bulls and bullocks below sixteen years -

Whether constitutional and valid.

HEADNOTE:

Sub-section (1) of s. 5 of the Bombay Animal

Preservation Act, 1954 prohibits slaughter of animals except

on a certificate in writing issued by the competent

authority that the animal is fit for slaughter. Sub-section

(1A) of s.5, substituted by Gujarat Act No. 23 of 1979,

prohibits grant of such a certificate in respect of (a) a

cow, (b) the calf of a cow, whether male or female, (c) a

bull below the age of sixteen years, and (d) a bullock below

the age of sixteen years. It was brought into force

retrospectively with effect from November 28, 1978. Sub-

section (2) of s. 5 prohibits issue of certificate in

respect of animals, to which sub-s. (1A) does not apply, if

in the opinion of the competent authority (a) the animal is

useful or likely to become useful for the purpose of draught

or any kind of agricultural operations, (b) the animal, if

male, is useful or likely to become useful for the purpose

of breeding, and (c) the animal, if female, is useful or

likely to become useful for the purpose of giving milk or

bearing offspring. Sub-section (3) of s. 5, also substituted

by Gujarat Act No. 23 of 1979, exempts from the purview of

s. 5 for bonafide religious purposes, the slaughter of (i)

animals above the age of fifteen years other than a cow,

bull or bullock, (ii) a bull above the age of fifteen years,

and (iii) a bullock above the

720

age of fifteen years provided a certificate in writing has

been obtained from the competent authority.

The appellants, who are dealers in beef and other

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 8

allied trades, assailed the constitutional validity of the

ban imposed by cls. (c) and (d) of sub-s. (1A) and sub-s.

(3) of s. 5 of the Act, on the slaughter of bulls and

bullocks, on various grounds, but the High Court repelled

all of them.

In these appeals by certificate, it was contended for

the appellants that the ban on the slaughter of bulls and

bullocks below the age of sixteen years imposed by cls. (c)

and (d) of sub-s. (1A) of s. 5 of the Act puts an

unreasonable restriction on their fundamental right under

Art. 19(1)(g) of the Constitution to carry on their trade

and profession, and that the ban so imposed is violative of

Art. 14 of the Constitution as it discriminates between

dealers who deal in meat of cows, bulls and bullocks and

those who deal in meat of buffaloes and other animals.

Dismissing the appeals, the Court,

^

HELD : 1. The prescription of the age of sixteen years

in cls. (c) and (d) of sub-s. (1A) of s. 5 of the Bombay

Animal Preservation Act, 1954 cannot be said to be an

unreasonable restriction looking to the balance which has to

be struck between public interest, that required useful

animals to be preserved and permitting the appellants to

carry on their trade and profession as mentioned in Art.

19(1)(g) of the Constitution. [729 C-D; H]

The longevity of cattle and their useful span of life

in the State of Gujarat has increased appreciably with the

help of the scientific advances which have taken place in

recent years, such as better cattle feeding, better medical

health and better animal husbandry services. There is no

doubt that if the scientific tests were to be applied, bulls

and bullocks up to sixteen years of age would be found

useful for the purpose of breeding, draught and other

agricultural purposes. [729 B-C]

2. Clauses (c) and (d) of sub-s. (1A) of s. 5 of the

Act are not hit by Art. 14 of the Constitution. It is only

if the classification is unreasonable that the impugned

provisions can be struck down.[730 C]

721

In the instant case, looking to the different purposes

for which buffaloes and their progeny on the one hand and

cows and their progeny on the other are used in each State

it cannot be said that there is any hostile discrimination

against those who deal in meet of bulls and bullocks. The

dealers in different types of meat are not in the same

class. A clear distinction is maintained on scientific

grounds between animals which are useful and which have not

yet reached the age of sixteen years so far as bulls and

bullocks are concerned. As regards buffaloes, there is no

restriction as to the age, the only bar being sub-s. (2) of

s. 5, based on their usefulness for purposes of draught,

agricultural operations, breeding, giving milk or bearing

offsprings. Bulls and bullocks are useful for agricultural

purposes but male buffaloes are seldom used for any purpose

other than breeding or rearing progeny. [730 E-G]

Abdul Hakim Qureshi & Ors. v. State of Bihar, [1961] 2

S.C.R. 610, referred to.

JUDGMENT:

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 1734-

39 of 1980.

From the Judgment and Order dated 4.7.1980 of the

Gujarat High Court in S.C.A. Nos. 185, 186, 187, 188, 189

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 8

and 190 of 1980.

M.C. Bhandare, M. Quamaruddin, Mrs. M. Quamaruddin,

M.V. Katarki and Salmon Khurshid for the Appellants.

G.A. Shah, Girish Chandra, C.V. Subba Rao and R.N.

Poddar for the Respondent.

T.U. Mehta, H.J. Zaveri, S.S. Khanduja and Yashpal

Dhingra for the Intervener.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by r.

R.B. MISRA, J. In the wake of Art. 48 of the

Constitution the State of Bombay also passed an enactment,

the Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954 for the

preservation of animals suitable for milch, breeding or for

agricultural

722

purposes. Under sub-s. (1) of s.2 the Act was to apply in

the first instance to the animals specified in the schedule

and the schedule mentioned bovines (bulls, bullocks, cows,

calves, male and female buffaloes and buffalo-calves). Under

sub-s. (2) of 8.2 the State Government may, by notification

in the official gazette, apply the provisions of this Act to

any other animal, which in its opinion, it is desirable to

preserve. It does not appear that the provisions of the Act

were ever made Applicable to any other animals after the

initial enactment of the Act and the schedule by the Bombay

legislature. Section 5 of the Act, so far it is material,

runs :

"5.(1) Notwithstanding any law for the time being

in force or any usage to the contrary, no person

shall slaughter any animal unless he has obtained

in respect of such animal a certificate in writing

from the Competent Authority appointed for the

area that the animal is fit for slaughter."

In 1961 by the Gujarat Act 16 of 1961, sub-s. (lA) was

inserted in s. 5 of the principal Act which read :

"(1A) No certificate under sub-s. (1) shall be

granted in respect of a cow".

Thereupon a consequential change was effected in sub-s.

(2) of 8.5, after the insertion of sub-s. (lA). It read :

"(2) In respect of an animal to which sub-s. (lA)

does not apply, no certificate shall be granted

under sub-s. (1), if in the opinion of the

competent authority :

(a) the animal, whether male or female, is useful

or likely to become useful for the purpose of

draught or any kind of agricultural operations;

(b) the animal, if male, is useful or likely to

become useful for the purpose of breeding;

(c) the animal, if female, is useful or likely to

become useful for the purpose of giving or bearing

offspring."

723

Under sub-s. (3) of s.5 it was provided :

"(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to the

slaughter of any animal above the age of fifteen

years for bonafide religious purposes, if such

animal is not a cow.

Provided that a certificate in writing for such

slaughter has been obtained from the competent

authority."

In 1978 the Governor of Gujarat issued an ordinance

being Gujarat Ordinance No. 10 of 1978 to amend the Bombay

Animal Preservation Act, 1954. During the period of

operation of the ordinance the Bombay Animal Preservation

Act 1954 was to have effect subject to the amendments

specified in s.3 of the ordinance and thus the Bombay Act

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 8

was temporarily amended. By this Amending Ordinance of 1978

under 9. 5 of the principal Act for sub-s. (lA) of new sub-

s. (lA) was substituted, which read :

"(lA) No certificate under sub-s. (1) shall be

granted in respect of :-

(a) a cow ;

(b) the calf of a cow, whether male or female and

if male. whether castrated or not ;

(c) a bull below the age of eighteen years ;

(d) a bullock below the age of eighteen years."

For sub-s. (3) of s. 5 of the principal Act a new sub-s. was

substituted, which read

"(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to the

slaughter of any of the following animals for

bonafide religious purposes, namely :-

(a) Any animal above the age of fifteen years

other than a cow, bull or bullock.

724

(b) A bull above the age of eighteen years.

(c) A bullock above the age of eighteen years."

After the above ordinance was promulgated the

legislative assembly of the State met and in view of that

session of the legislative assembly the provisions of the

ordinance were required to be enacted by the legislature

otherwise the ordinance was to lapse. As the legislature did

not pass the requisite legislation in time the ordinance

lapsed on March 5, 1979.

Thereafter Gujarat Act No. 23 viz, the Bombay Animal

Preservation (Gujarat Amendment) Act, 1979, was enacted and

by virtue of sub-s. (2) of s.1 the provisions of the Act

were deemed to have come into force on 28th November, 1978,

that is, from the date on which the Gujarat Ordinance No. 10

of 1978 was brought into force. This amendment Act also

inserted a new sub-s. (LA) in 6. 5 of the Principal Act. It

read :

"(1A) No certificate under sub-s. (1) shall be

granted in respect of:-

(a) a cow;

(b) the calf of a cow, whether male or female and

if male. whether castrated or not.

(c) a bull below the age of sixteen years;

(d) a bullock below the age of sixteen years."

It is apparent that in cls. (C) and (d) changes were

affected inasmuch as instead of cl. (c) providing for a bull

below the age of 18 years, as in the ordinance, the Act

provided in the new cl.(c) for a bull below the age of 16

years, and similarly in cl.(d) it provided for a bullock

below the age of 16 years instead of 18 years provided in

the ordinance. The impugned enactment also inserted a new

sub-s.(3) which read :

"(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to :

725

(a) the slaughter of any of the following animals

For such bona fide religious purposes, as may be

prescribed namely :

(i) any animal above the age of fifteen years

other than a cow, bull or bullock;

(ii) a bull above the age of fifteen years ;

(iii) a bullock above the age of fifteen years ;

(b) the slaughter of any animal not being a cow or

a calf of a cow, on such religious days as may be

prescribed :

Provided that a certificate in writing for the

slaughter referred to in clauses (a) or (b) has

been obtained from the competent authority."

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 8

The appellants who are dealers in beef and other allied

trades connected with the slaughter of bulls and bullocks

seek to challenge the ban of 16 yrs. put by cls. (c) and (d)

of sub-s. (lA) of sec. 5 of the Act as it adversely affects

their trades.

According to the appellants a large number of people in

Ahmedabad city and in the State of Gujarat are engaged in

the beef trade, both wholesale and retail and the allied

trades. Several hundred shops of beef dealers, both

wholesalers and retailers, are located in Ahemdabad city

alone, and on an average before the new legislation came

into force about 100 bovine cattle were being slaughtered in

the slaughter houses in Ahemdabad city. Out of these above

seventy used to be bulls and twenty five to thirty

buffaloes. Because of slaughter of bovine cattle there are

incidental trades which are dependent upon slaughter of

bovines, their hides and skins and carcases of animals.

Carcases are used for the purpose of food which is cheaper

food for a large number of people. Hides and skins after

they are properly treated and processed serve the export

market and thereby also serve the country by earning a good

deal of foreign exchange. It was further urged that the

different parts of cattle which are slaughtered, like

hooves, horns, guts, pancreas, bones, liver bile and even

the blood

726

of animals are all used for pharmaceutical purposes and

products. They are also used for manufacturing concentrates

of drugs and injections meant for supplying proteins to

human beings. Bones of animals which are slaughtered are

utilised for the purpose of manufacturing fertilisers. Hides

and skins of animals which have a natural death are of

inferior quality as compared to the hides and skins of

animals which are slaughtered. Calcium is recovered from

bons of slaughtered animals. Glue is made from hooves etc.

Bulls and bullocks cease to be useful for an purpose

after the age of fifteen years and thus the ban on the

slaughter of bull and bullocks below the age of 16 years is

an unreasonable restriction on their right to carry on their

trade or business and is not in the interest of general

public.

On the one hand there are the directive principles of

Art. 48 of the Constitution which require consideration of

usefulness of animals from the point of view of giving milk,

breeding, agricultural purposes and draught purposes; on the

other hand there is the requirement of those poor sections

of people who get their protein requirement from beef which

is available to them at cheap rates. Thus a balance between

the requirement contemplated by Art. 48 and the requirement

of a large section of people and traders and dealers has to

be struck by the court. It was further pleaded that on

certain specified religious days animals are required to be

slaughtered, for example Qurbani at the time of Bakir Id or

Id festival, and there are also other religious ceremonies

in connection with which animals and bovine cattle are

required to be slaughtered.

The impugned Act was, therefore, challenged in the High

Court on a number of grounds :

1. that the impugned amendment puts an

unreasonable restriction on the fundamental right

of the petitioners under Art. 19(1)(g) of the

Constitution :

2. that the State of Gujarat has acted mala fide

in enacting this piece of legislation, being the

727

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 8

Gujarat Act 23 of 1979;

3. that the State legislature has no legislative

competence to enact the impugned legislation ;

4. that the amended sub-s. (3) of s. 5 is an

interference with their religious practices and

customs and hence violative of Arts. 25, 26 and 29

of the Constitution ;

5. that the impugned provisions are discriminatory

and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution

inasmuch as the discrimination is made between

those who deal in meat of bulls and bullocks on

the one hand and those who deal in meat of

buffaloes on the other.

All these contentions were repelled by the High Court.

Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order of the High

Court the appellants have now come to this Court by

certificate and only two contentions have ben raised on

their behalf:

1. The ban on the slaughter of bulls and bullocks

below the age of sixteen years is hit by Art.

19(1)(g) of the Constitution as it puts an un-

reasonable restriction on the fundamental right of

the appellants and is not in the interest of

general public.

2. The ban put by cls. (c) and (d) of sub-s. (lA)

of 6. 5 of the Act is also violative of Art. 14 of

the Constitution.

In support of their contentions reliance was placed on

Abdul Hakim Quraishi & Ors. V. State of Bihar, [1961] 2

S.C.R. 610. It was held in that case that the ban on the

slaughter of bulls, bullocks and she-buffaloes below the age

of 20 or 25 years was not a reasonable restriction in the

interest of general public and was void as a bull, bullock

or buffalo did not remain useful after the age of 15 years

and whatever little use it may have then was greatly offset

by the economic disadvantages of feeding and maintaining

unserviceable cattle.

728

In the affidavit in reply filed in this case it has

been pointed out on behalf of the Government that because of

improvement and more scientific methods of cattle breeding

and also advancement in the science of looking after the

health of cattle in the State of Gujarat today a situation

has been reached where the usefulness of cattle for

breeding, draught and other agricultural purposes is above

the age of sixteen years.

Mr. P.J. Bhatt, Under Secretary to the Government of

Gujarat, Agriculture, Forests and Co-operation Department,

in his affidavit dated March 14, 1980 has pointed out in

paragraph 11 as follows:

"With the improved and scientific animal husbandry

services in the State, the average longevity of

animals in the State has considerably increased.

In 1960, there were 456 Veterinary Dispensaries,

First Aid Veterinary Centres, etc. whereas in the

year 1979, there were as many as 800 Veterinary

Dispensaries, First Aid Veterinary Centres etc.

There were no mobile Veterinary Dispensaries in

1960, while there were 20 such mobile dispensaries

for animals in 1979. In addition to this there are

more than 600 centres for intensive cattle

development programme, where, besides first aid to

animals, other animal husbandry inputs are also

provided. In 1960, five lacs of cattle were

vaccinated, whereas in the year 1979, fiftyone

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 8

lacs cattle were vaccinated to provide

immunization against various diseases of animals.

There were no cattle Feed Compounding Units

preparing cattle feed on scientific lines in the

year 1960, while in the year 1979, there were as

many as 6 cattle feed factories in the State of

Gujarat. As a result of improved Animal Husbandry

services, the disease of Rinderpest which was

widespread in the State and which took a large

toll of animal life has been totally wiped out and

eradicated since the year 1971-72, except for an

isolated recurrence in the year 1978 in the cattle

impooted in the State from abroad. Similarly, in

respect of Haemorrhagic Septicaemia, a disease

which used to take a heavy

729

toll of animals, the total number of deaths on

account of the disease was 6689 in the year 1961-

62 which has been brought down to about 2000 in

the year 1978-79 on account of intensive

vaccination programme undertaken by the

Government."

It is thus clear that because of various scientific

factors, namely, better cattle feeding, better medical

health and better animal husbandry services, the longevity

of cattle in the State of Gujarat has increased and in this

context it is correct to say that if the scientific tests

were to be applied, bulls and bullocks upto sixteen years of

age can be said to be useful for the purpose of breeding,

draught and other agricultural purposes. In these

circumstances the prescription of The age of sixteen years

in clauses (c) and (d) of sub-s. (lA) of s.5 can be said to

be reasonable, looking to the balance which has to be struck

between public interest, which requires useful animals to be

preserved and permitting the different appellants before us

to carry on their trade and profession.

In a passage from the publication of the Indian Council

of Agricultural Research, New Delhi published in the year

1962, which was reprinted in the year 1967, it has been

pointed out :

"Indian cattle are found to do well in dry areas.

They are small and non-decrepit in area of heavy

rainfall, such as the coastal or the hilly areas

of the country. Cattle of good breeds are thus

found in Punjab, Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh.

Varying types of cattle may be seen within the

limits of the same State. Thus in Bombay one finds

excellent cattle in Gujarat and similar dry parts

of the State, while in Madras, such cattle are

observed in Coimbatore."

The material before the court thus clearly goes to show

that with the help of the scientific advances which have

taken place since 1962, the longevity of the cattle and

their useful span of life has increased and, therefore, the

prescribed age of sixteen years can be said to be a

reasonable restriction on the right of the appellants to

carry on their trade and profession as mentioned in Article

19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

730

This leads us to the second contention regarding the

impugned legislation being discriminatory between dealers

who deal in meat of cows, bulls and bullocks and those who

deal in meat of buffaloes and other animals and there is no

uniform law with respect to all cattle. As a second limb to

this agrument it was further contended that the cattle and

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 8

beef dealers in other States are not subjected to the

similar restrictions, and thus there is a violation of Art.

14 of the Constitution.

This contention in our opinion has no force. The

dealers in different tpes of meat are not in the same class.

It is only if the classification is unreasonable that it can

be struck down. But here a clear distinction is maintained

on scientific grounds between animals which are useful and

which have not yet reached the age of 16 years so far as

bulls and bullocks are concerned. As regards buffaloes there

is no restriction as to the age and the only restriction is

sub-s. (2) of s. 5 and that section has remained unamended,

namely the test is whether the animal, male or female, is

useful or likely to become useful for the purposes of milch

or draught or any kind of agricultural operations; whether

the animal, if male is useful or likely t become useful for

the purpose of breeding, and whether the animal, if female,

is useful or likely to become useful for the purpose of

giving milk or bearing offspring. So looking to the

different purposes for which buffaloes and their progeny on

the one hand and cows and their progeny on the other hand

are used in each State it cannot be said that there is any

hostile discrimination against those who deal in meat of

bulls and bullocks. Bulls and bullocks, particularly

bullocks, are useful for agricultural purposes and male

buffaloes are seldom used for any purpose other than

breeding or rearing progeny and under these circumstances

the impugned amendment is not hit by Art. 14 of the

Constitution.

In the result the appeals must fail. Accordingly they

are dismissed with costs.

P.S.S. Appeals dismissed.

731