A rural sport, which for years was viewed by the courts as cruelty to animals, has now received judicial imprimatur. A surge in popular support for Jallikattu led to legislative changes in early 2017, exempting it from the rigors of the law against animal cruelty. Six years after the Court-ordered ban on amendments expires, The Supreme Court has upheld the changes made by the Tamil Nadu Assemblyas well as the cultural spirit behind Jallikattu, a traditional sport in which men try to tame raging bulls. There has been an endless struggle between activists and supporters of the sport, which culminated in a 2014 court ruling banning the sport. Activists argue that any sport involving physical competition between humans and bulls violates animal rights, while the other camp argues that no one should stop something that is part of the state’s tradition and culture. The state government responded to the ban by amending the Central Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 in its application to the state and obtained the assent of the President. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has now settled the issue by ruling in favor of Jallikattu as a cultural event.
The judgment of the five-judge bench is based on two major findings. The basis for the 2014 decision was that the new rules reduce the brutality and potential for pain of the sport. Those conditions were not very common. Second, the Court has accepted the view of the legislature that Jallikattu is a sport conducted every year to observe the tradition and culture. It has accepted the legislature’s knowledge of what cultural heritage is, holding that the Court cannot initiate such an inquiry. However, this does not mean that the court has in any way weakened the portion of the previous bench’s judgment that read full import of international regulations in favor of animal rights in Indian law. Instead, it has sidestepped the cultural sentiment under the legislative scheme by which sports such as Jallikattu, Kambala, buffalo racing in Karnataka and bullock cart racing in Maharashtra are not prohibited by laws prohibiting animal cruelty. This means that the organizers as well as the relevant governments still bear the burden of preventing pain and cruelty to animals. These sports also pose an undeniable danger to humans; Mainly to the participants, but sometimes to the spectators as well. It may be time that the organizers should mandate protective gear for the participants and strictly enforce the rules of proper barricades to keep the spectators safe. Cultural assertion, and adherence to animal kindness and safety norms, should not be mutually exclusive.