The action of the Delhi Police which investigated Kerala House has shocked many. If we need to understand the lawlessness in the action of the police, we need to understand rules associated with the issue.
In 1994, the Delhi assembly passed the Delhi Agricultural Cattle Preservation law. Cows, calves, bullocks and bulls were covered by the law. Buffalo is not part of the list. According to the fourth section of the law, animals covered by this law cannot be killed. As per section five and seven, they cannot be traded or transported to be killed. Similarly, meat of animals meant for agriculture cannot be kept in one's possession as per section eight. Section nine bars stocking meat of the listed animals even if they are killed outside Delhi. Violating section four, five and seven can attract up to five years in jail while violating sections eight and nine can attract punishment of up to one year in jail. The law is made tougher, and perhaps barbaric, by incorporating the provision that the onus of proving one's innocence lies with the accused and that the crime, if proved, is non-bailable.
The provisions allow the Animal Husbandry director or veterinary officer to raid premises of the accused on the assumption that the law has been violated.
The police can raid any premise if they feel that the law has been violated, however with riders. The law allows the police to search or raid premises of the accused only when the listed animals are being transported for killing. This means that the police cannot barge into the kitchen of the accused on the assumption that the law is being violated; that right wrests with the Animal Husbandry director or concerned veterinary officer only.
Maharashtra had passed a similar amendment in 1995 and included it in its animal husbandry rules. The President of India approved the rule this year. The constitutional validity of the law was questioned in the High Court of Mumbai and the court had issued an interim order stating that the state was not to implement any measures until a final verdict was issued by courts. Only Maharashtra and Delhi have made it a crime to store meat of listed animals that are killed outside the states. This means that eating them in the state is also a crime.
The question is, are not these rules violation of sections 21 and 301 of the constitution? The Supreme Court has given its assent against killing cows and has not examined rules on storing or eating beef. That makes the ninth section of the law, described above, anti constitutional.
Lets us hope that the Delhi Police, whose action at Kerala House was without legal basis, display the same enthusiasm when women and children are attacked.
(The author is an advocate in the Supreme Court)
Disclaimer
The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Manorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.