A Study On The Constitutional Dialectic Of Jallikattu Jurisprudence
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 4
- 1 min read
Sai Prarthana M, B.Com., LL.B., (Hons.), School of Excellence in Law, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai
ABSTRACT
This paper critically analyses the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s landmark judgement in the case of ‘Animal Welfare Board v. A. Nagaraj & Ors.’ which marked a defining moment in India’s animal jurisprudence and constitutional mandates on animal rights. By declaring the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009, as unconstitutional and repugnant to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, it upheld Articles 21, 51A(g) and 51A(h) of the Constitution. The Court analysed the averments of both parties, pertinent precedents and the discrepancies between the Acts. Through an eco-centric approach and relying on the doctrines of parens patriae and ejusdem generis, the Hon’ble Court affirmed that traditional and cultural practices do not supersede constitutional mandates of cruelty against animals although this progressive stance was revisited and later overturned in the case of ‘Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of India (2023).’ This paper analysis the shift from an animal welfare-centric legislation to a balanced judicial philosophy seeking equilibrium between animal rights and cultural identity. The paper concludes that without true reform, strict enforcement, institutional accountability and public awareness and reform, laws risk to remain as symbolic promises on paper.
Keywords: Animal Welfare, Jallikattu, Cultural Rights, Fundamental Duties, Eco-centric Approach
