Supreme Court Refused To Entertain Plea To Switch Over To Lab-Grown Meat: ‘Killing Of Animals For Food Permissible Under Law’
The Supreme Court in the case Sachin Gupta vs UOI observed and has dismissed as the petition is withdrawn wherein seeking to curb the killing of animals and to switch over to lab-generated meat for human consumption.
The bench comprising of Justice KM Joseph and Justice BV Nagarathna in the case observed and has granted the petitioner the liberty to withdraw the plea after hearing arguments for a while.
It has been pointed out by the bench headed by Justice Joseph that the statute (Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act) itself permitting the killing of animals for food. It has been asked by the Judge, how can there be a policy contrary to the legislation.
The court stated that your principle ground is that there shouldn’t be any cruelty to animals. In Law, the same comes under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. Section 11 (Treating animals cruelly) which permits eating (of animals).
Can the government frame a policy which being contrary to the existing law?
What are you asking the Court?
It being one of the grounds in which the said policy is being challenged apart from it being arbitrary, unconstitutional or contrary to fundamental rights.
Further, it has been observed by the court that the executive action cannot be contrary to a statute.
The bench headed by Justice Nagarathna weighed, wherein stating that the court is of the considered view that the large population in the country, consumption of meat cannot be banned.
It has also been clarified by the petitioner that the petition is not for banning but to have alternate sources instead of killing animals.
It has been asked by the court that whose fundamental rights were affected for the petitioner to move a plea under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
The bench added which prompted the advocate to do the same that this court suggest you withdraw it and move at a later stage.
In the present case, the petitioner Advocate Sachin Gupta, who had recently completed his Bachelors in Law, was being appreciated by the Court during the previous hearing for his drafting and research skills.
