Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Saturday, February 22, 2025

Madras HC Issues Guidelines For Transporting Cattles From One Place To Another

Posted in: General Practice
Sun, Feb 9, 25, 10:31, 2 Weeks ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 16650
Abbas Manthiri vs State the rules should be strictly followed to ensure the safety and well-being of the cattle during transportation.

It is definitely in the fitness of things that Madras High Court which is one of the oldest and most reputed High Courts in India has in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Abbas Manthiri vs State in Crl.R.C.Nos.1421, 1461 & 1433 of 2024 and cited in 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 46 that was reserved on 25.10.2024 and then finally pronounced on 31.01.2024 has issued guidelines to be followed during the transit from one place to another. It must be underscored that the Court was most explicit in laying down that the rules should be strictly followed to ensure the safety and well-being of the cattle during transportation. It merits singular attention that the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice M Nirmal Kumar was most forthright to observe clearly that transporting cattle was a careful process that required strict adherence to the Animal Welfare Regulations, proper vehicle equipment, and ensuring the cattle’s health and safety during the journey.

At the very outset, this remarkable, robust, rational and recent judgment authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice M Nirmal Kumar of Madras High Court sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
The Criminal Revision Cases filed praying to set aside the order dated 22.07.2024, passed in Crl.M.P.No.1137 of 2024 & Crl.M.P.No.1138 of 2024 respectively, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Chengalpattu, and the order dated 10.08.2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurantakam, consequently to direct the 1st respondent to release 22 Bulls and 2 Calves, 21 Bulls and 74 Bullock respectively in Crl.R.C.No.1421 of 2024, Crl.R.C.No.1433 of 2024 and Crl.R.C.No.1461 of 2024 and handover the same to the Petitioners.

Most significantly, before elaborating on anything else, it would be most fruitful to lay bare what is encapsulated in para 18 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating that:
There are several rules and practices that must be followed to ensure the safety and well-being during the transit of Cattle. Transporting cattle is a careful process that requires strict adherence to Animal Welfare Regulations, proper vehicle equipment, and ensuring the Cattle’s health and safety during the journey.

The following guidelines to be strictly followed while transporting the Cattle from one place to another place/District/State:

  1. The Transporters of Cattle to ensure adequate space to stand, lie down, and turn around.
  2. Safety must be ensured while loading and unloading of cattle, in order to prevent injury and stress. The ramps and loading docks should be designed to prevent cattle from slipping or falling.
  3. During transit of cattle, they must be provided ventilation and to ensure warm temperatures in the container/vehicle.
  4. In case of long transit of cattle through vehicle, food and water should be provided in the interregnum period of pick-up and drop points.
  5. Before transporting the cattle, it has to be checked whether the cattle health conditions are fit to transport from one place to another.
  6. During transportation, the cattle has to be monitored whether it has any signs of distress, injury, or illness and if found, the cattle should be removed immediately from the vehicle and should be treated.
  7. The transport vehicles should be cleaned before transportation of cattle, to avoid spread of disease.
  8. Proper documents from the respective officers should be obtained by the purchasers/transporter while transit of cattle.
  9. In case of long journey, a certificate from the veterinary doctors should be obtained specifying how long and how far the cattle can be transported.
  10. After arriving at the destination, cattle should be monitored for signs of any injury, if any, must be taken care of.


To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 2 while elaborating on facts of the case that:
Facts, which are germane for disposal of the Revisions can be summarised as follows:- On the complaint of the 2nd Respondent/defaco complainant, who are the Trust Member of Almighty Animal Care Trust, and State President of Gau Raksha Dal respectively Crl.R.C.Nos.1421 & 1433 of 2024 and Crl.R.C.No.1461 of 2024 gave complaints before the 1st Respondent Police that the Petitioners illegally transporting Cattle in Container Lorries, bearing Registration Nos.TN-60-AV-4227 and TN-60- Q-3265 and TN-51-AG-7777. When the Container Lorries intercepted by the Police, they found in the Container Lorry, bearing Registration No.TN-60-AV-4227 with 22 Cattle & 2 Calves and in the other Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-60-Q-3265 having 21 Cattle and in other Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-51-AG-7777, having 74 Cattle in a cruel manner. The animals were rescued. On enquiry, it was informed by the drivers of the lorries that the Cattle were taken to Kerala for slaughter.

Since the Cattle in all the lorries transported to Kerala in inhumane conditions, for the meat illegally, tightly cramped, without food and water, and the Cattle are below 10 years in age, the case in Crime No.192/2004 and Crime No.216/2024 registered respectively for the offence U/s. 429 of IPC., r/w Sections 11(1)(a), 11(1)(d) & 4 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and Section 325 BNS Act r/w Section 11(1)(a), 11(1)(b), 11(1)(d), 11(1)(e) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, against the owners of the Container Lorries and others. The Container Lorries and Cattle were seized by the Police. Upon seizure of the Cattle, they were sent to Sri Gokulakrishna Kosala, Tiruvallur District, a private barn, and Mona’s Heaven for Domestic Animals Trust under an interim detention of the bulls by the 1st Respondent Police.

It is worth noting that the Bench notes in para 16 that:
It is not in dispute that on the complaint of the 2nd Respondent/defacto complainant, who are the Trust Member of Almighty Animal Care Trust, and State President of Gau Raksha Dal respectively Crl.R.C.Nos.1421 & 1433 of 2024 and Crl.R.C.No.1461 of 2024, the 1st Respondent Police, intercepted the Container Lorry, bearing Registration No.TN-60-AV-4227 found with 22 Cattle & 2 Calves and in the other Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-60-Q-3265 having 21 Cattle and in another Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-51-AG-7777, having 74 Cattle in a cruel manner were transported. The animals were rescued.

On enquiry, it was informed by the drivers of the lorries that the Cattle were taken to Kerala for butchering. Since the Cattle in all the lorries transported to Kerala in inhumane conditions, for the meat illegally, tightly cramped, without food and water, and the Cattle are below 10 years in age, the case in Crime No.192/2004 and Crime No.216/2024 registered respectively for the offence U/s. 429 of IPC., r/w Sections 11(1)(a), 11(1)(d) & 4 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and Section 325 BNS Act r/w Section 11(1)(a), 11(1)(b), 11(1)(d), 11(1)(e) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, against the owners of the Container Lorries and others. The Container Lorries and Cattle were seized by the Police. Upon confiscation of the Cattle, they were sent to Sri Gokulakrishna Kosala, and Mona’s Heaven for Domestic Animals Trust under an interim detention of the Cattle by the 1st Respondent Police.

The Petitioners filed Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions in Crl.M.P.No.1137/2024 and Crl.M.P.No.1138/2024, and C.M.P.No.596/2024, before the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Chengalpattu, for return of Cattle, as interim custody. The Learned Judicial Magistrate, declined to give the interim custody of the cattle to the Petitioners on the ground that the Petitioners violated the provisions of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and that inhumane treatment meted out to the Cattle, by transporting the Cattle in Container Lorries, in a jam packed manner, which is especially alleged to have transported for butchery, which is prohibited, has dismissed petitions. Against which, the Petitioners are before this Court with these Revisions.

It would be instructive to note that Bench notes in para 17 that:
No doubt, in the case on hand, large number of Cattle transported by the petitioners in an inhumane manner and transporting in the Container Lorries. It is seen from the records that in one Container Lorry, 22 Bulls and 2 Calves, in another Container Lorry, 21 Bulls and other Lorry, 74 Bullock transported from Andhrapradesh to Kerala, without providing basic facilities like feeding, water, sufficient place to the Cattle even to stand. Initial inquiry and the report from the Veterinary Doctor revealed that the Cattle were transported from Andhra Pradesh to Kerala in unhygienic conditions, with chilli flakes sprinkled and chillies placed in the eyes of Cattle to keep them awake and the Cattle are below 10 years in age, thus, there is a clear violation of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Transport of Animal Rules, 1978. As per Rules 47 to 56 of the Transport of Animal Rules, 1978 specifies that no goods vehicle should carry more than six cattle and there should be a valid certificate by a qualified Veterinary Surgeon that the animals are fit to travel and each consignment should bear a label showing the name and address of the consignor and the consignee. Absolutely, nothing has been followed in this case and the trial Courts are right in dismissing the petitions filed by the Petitioners, which needs no interference. The present arrangement of maintaining the Cattle in the respective Khosala and to be continued till the trial is completed and final orders passed entrusting custody of Cattle.

As a corollary, the Bench then holds in para 19 that:
In view of the forgoing reasons, the Civil Revision Petitions are dismissed.

Finally, the Bench then draws the curtains of this pragmatic judgment by stating in para 20 that:
This Court places its appreciation to the young Advocate Ms. Madhumitha, for her meticulous preparation and strenuous submission.

All told, it merits just no reiteration that what all the Madras High Court has laid down in this most commendable judgment for transporting cattles needs to be followed in letter and spirit. Of course, this will go a long way in ensuring the safety and well being of cattles. No denying!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut - 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
India is going on grate path of welfare-state. Mahatma Gandhi's greatest ambition for India was to wipe every tear from every eye
Social justice means a way of life with liberty, equality and fraternity as the principles of life.
BJP after always repeatedly assuring the lawyers of West UP that they will make sure that a high court bench is created soon here as soon as it comes to power has reneged on its tall promises and has done virtually nothing on this score till now
To start with, I say this not as a lawyer of West UP but as a good citizen of India that the unending protest of lawyers of West UP severely affects the litigants who have to wait repeatedly to get justice. But who is responsible for this
It is most baffling to note that Centre since 1947 till 2018 has consistently, callously, blatantly and brazenly disregarded the numerous hardships faced by the more than 9 crore people of West UP in travelling nearly 700 to 750 km
Uttarakhand High Court in the landmark case of Lalit Kumar v Union of India & Ors in Writ Petition (PIL) No. 203 of 2014 dated 12 June 2018 directed the Centre to establish a Regional Bench of Armed Forces Tribunal in the State of Uttarakhand within four months.
West UP which deserved statehood right since 1947 has not even a single bench of a high court since last more than 70 years
High Court of Kerala has in a historic move directed the Indian Railways to treat identity cards issued to lawyers by respective Bar Councils as a valid identity proof to undertake a train journey/travel.
Constitution of Special District Courts to try cases as per the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Foreign law Firms cannot Practice in India, but they are free to give legal advice regarding foreign law on diverse international legal issues on a fly in and fly out basis if it does not amount to practice.
Each and every person who is humane whether he/she is Indian or Pakistani or anyone else is overjoyed on learning the news of the release of Abhinandan
crime against women are multiplying most rapidly in UP and this is most felt in West UP which is the worst affected of all the regions of UP.
In our country around 5 lakh accidents take place every year and 1.5 lakh deaths occur. In world highest number of deaths due to the accidents take place in India. It is our responsibility to control these deaths and promote road safety.
It was decided unanimously by all the lawyers of 22 districts of West UP to go on strike on November 25, 2019 and observe it as  protest day. The lawyers of West UP are not happy with the statement of Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad about the creation of a high court bench in West UP
parents of a married son are not entitled to claim filial compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.
Rambabu Singh Thakur v/s Sunil Arora serious note of the increase in the number of tainted candidates facing criminal cases entering politics. It has issued a slew of directions in this latest, landmark and extremely laudable judgment which we shall discuss later.
J&K High Court Bar Association v. UOI dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought prohibition of use of pellet guns. How long can security forces restrain themselves if public becomes unruly and start pelting stones, bottles and what not
Harmanbhai Umedbhai Patel vs Bindu Kumar Mohanlal Shahupheld an order passed by the Bar Council of India (BCI) dismissing a complaint alleging professional misconduct by a lawyer. There was no professional misconduct found on the part of the lawyer.
Kangana Ranaut vs Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai restraining the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai from carrying out any further demolition at Kangana Ranaut's residence in Bandra
The Telangana Fire Works Dealers Association vs. P Indra Prakash has modified the order of the Telangana High Court which imposed a complete and immediate ban on the sale and use of firecrackers across the state during Diwali to fall in line with the directions imposed by the National Green Tribunal on November 9
The non-availability of birth certificate is issued when the person does not have a birth proof. One can visit the municipal corporation, gram panchayat or chief medical officer in the area where he or she is born and apply for this document, showing address proof and proofs of 2 more witnesses on an affidavit.
M. Thangaraj (Ex. MC) v. The District Collector, Dindigul to follow the ritual of taking a procession around the temple (Girivalam) has recently on January 18, 2021 observed that all the religious processions should spread positivity and brotherhood and in no manner should be a cause for any communal disturbance.
K Raju v. UOI only senior citizens/parents are entitled to file an appeal against an order passed by the Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007.
Kolkata Municipal Corporation authorities to take action against people found slaughtering cattle including cows and/or exhibiting for sale flesh of slaughtered cattle and/or selling cattle meat.
Legal Industry and the Enhancement of the Technology Towards the Progressive Development In An Amicable Manner
Omnarayan Sharma Vs MP issued directions to the District Legal Services Authorities and the State Authority for ensuring implementation of poverty alleviation schemes promulgated under provisions of Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 and NALSA
Javed v Uttar Pradesh that the cow should be declared the national animal and cow protection should be made a fundamental right of the Hindus because we know that when the country's culture and its faith get hurt, the country becomes weak.
The ‘Green Channel’ is an automated and transparent system for gaining approval for certain type and combination of mergers and acquisition.
Hasae @ Hasana Wae vs UP that dilution of constitutional autonomy of the High Courts would threaten the concept of judicial federalism envisaged in the Constitution and affirmed by judicial precedents.
Madhya Pradesh vs Pujari Utthan Avam Kalyan Samiti that the presiding deity of the temple is the owner of the land attached to the temple and Pujari is only to perform puja and to maintain the properties of the deity.
Alkesh Vs MP in a case under SC/ST Act, the caste of the complainant is of paramount importance and is a sine qua non and that it can't be assumed that the complainant would forget to mention in the FIR that the assailants had made aspersions against his caste.
The non-availability of birth certificate is a document to register unregistered birth. It can also be used in case the applicant has lost his birth certificate to a fire, flood or any other reason.
a Dalit man named Lakhbir Singh aged 35 years who was a food server with no political affiliation of any kind or any past criminal record would first be beaten black
Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Kapil Sibal states The whole Act is an attempt to aggrandize the power of the State.
Char Dham Highway expansion in full court room exchange took the extremely commendable, clear, cogent, composed, courageous and convincing stand that concerns of defence forces cannot be overridden.
Bindu v. Allahabad that as per Article 233(2), a person seeking appointment as a District Judge must be practicing as an advocate for continuous 7 years (without any break) on the date of application.
TC Gupta v. UOI that the petitioner-advocate who in more than one matters, has indulged in filing Original Applications in the Tribunal as well as writ petitions in the High Court and has personally signed the pleadings etc without having been specifically authorized in this regard by the litigants which cannot be glossed over.
Swaran Kaur vs Punjab that entitlement for the grant of family pension to the dependent parents needs to be seen after the widow or the children loose their eligibility for the grant of the said benefit.
Zubair Ahmed Teli Vs. Union Territory of J&K that there is no requirement of prior consideration of the social investigation report by Juvenile Justice Board while considering a bail plea under Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act,
Chandrashekhar R vs Karnataka that Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution embodies the principle of religious tolerance which is a characteristic of Indian civilization disposed of a public interest litigation alleging that the contents of Azan
Suresh Kumar vs CP upholding the dismissal of a police head constable who was caught with 75 dirhams while on duty of checking passengers passports of the Indira Gandhi International Airport in 1996, observing that the police officers who break law must be dealt with iron hands.
Mohd Abdul Khaliq Vs UP that the Central Government would take the request appropriate decision to ban cow slaughter in the country and to declare the same as a protected national animal.
Nikhil Singh Vs UOI that: As would be evident from the chart supplied by Dr KN Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, most of the Airports/Airstrips in the State of Bihar are non-functional.
While striking entirely the right chord as the lawyers anticipated also, we saw how just recently it was none other than the Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Bar Association
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) President Dr Adish C Aggarwala who recently got elected as President after surpassing many of his strong competitors with most strongest being Mr Dushyant Dave
Al Tawaf Hajj And Umrah Travel And Tourism vs UoI that: Haj Pilgrimage and the ceremonies involved therein and the ceremonies involved therein fall within the ambit of a religious practice, which is protected by the Constitution of India.
It is ‘shockingly bizarre’ that UP has maximum pending cases among all States that is more than 10 lakhs in High Courts and about a crore in lower courts and has maximum population
South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs BN Magon that an advocate’s office run from a residential building is not subject to property tax under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act as a business building.
Meena Pradhan vs Kamla Pradhan that a will is required to fulfill all the formalities required under Section 63 of the Succession Act.
Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much, recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man/woman
Top