Jharkhand High Court Issues Directions To Police Authorities To Furnish Reports On Action Taken Against Unauthorized Meat Shops

The Jharkhand High Court has issued directives to all district superintendents of police to furnish reports on their actions against unauthorized meat shops operating within their jurisdictions.

This development stems from a public interest litigation initiated by Shyamanand Pandey, who brought attention to the sale of meat in open areas. The petitioner argued that such practices of slaughtering animals openly, especially near roads where they are visible to all, are not appropriate.

However, the petitioner pointed out that local municipal bodies and the State's Food Commissioner, who also serves as the Health Secretary, have not addressed this matter adequately.

The division bench comprising Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Arun Kumar Rai directed, “The argument has been advanced that if the Senior Superintendent of Police and the Superintendent of Police of the concerned districts have communicated the concerned police stations to deal with such situation and even if the shops are being allowed run, then it is dereliction in duty of the concerned police stations even in spite of the specific direction passed in this regard by this Court.”

“The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and Superintendent of Police of the concerned districts are hereby directed to file affidavit that what action has been taken against the erring officer in-charge of the concerned police stations on or before the next date of hearing,” the bench further directed.

The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of pro bono publico sought a direction to the respondent to prohibit the illegal culling of animals (including poultry birds) and displaying carcasses to the general public on the roads of Ranchi.

The petitioner further sought a directive to the respondent to implement the provisions of Food Safety and Standards (Licencing and Registration of Food Business), Regulations 2011, particularly Regulation 2.1.2 (5) read with Part IV whereby and whereunder slaughtering of animal / birds inside the shop premises is strictly prohibited and specific sanitary & hygienic requirements for the retail meat shops including provision for location of the meat shops have been stipulated.

Lastly, the petitioner sought a direction to the respondent to implement the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules, 2001, particularly Rule 6 whereby and whereunder slaughter of animals in the sight of other animals has been prohibited.

During the previous hearing on March 11, 2024, the petitioner's counsel highlighted the widespread illegal culling and public display of animal carcasses in the State, notably in its capital city, Ranchi. This practice, the counsel argued, contravenes both the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registration of Food Business) Regulations 2011 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules 2001.

The petitioner's counsel further emphasized that despite efforts made previously by the Administrator of the Ranchi Municipal Corporation, the issue persists. While some measures were taken with the assistance of district and police administrations, the petitioner's contention is that the practice continues unabated.

Subsequently, both the State counsel and counsel for the Ranchi Municipal Corporation requested a two-week extension to file their responses.

In the interim, the Court instructed the Deputy Commissioners of the respective districts, along with the Senior Superintendents of Police/Superintendents of Police, and local authorities to conduct comprehensive inspections of areas with shops involved in such activities.

Furthermore, the Senior Superintendent of Police/Superintendent of Police of the concerned districts were tasked with holding the officer-in-charge of the relevant police stations accountable. If anyone is found engaged in the unlawful slaughter of animals or operating without proper licenses, they were instructed to ensure legal action is taken against them.

The case was subsequently scheduled for April 3, 2024. During this hearing, the counsel representing the Ranchi Municipal Corporation reported that a comprehensive survey had been conducted. They informed the Court that details of shops operating without proper licenses had been provided to district authorities and the police.

However, during the hearing, the petitioner presented paper publications to the Court, demonstrating that no action had been taken by either the district authorities or the police administration. The petitioner expressed concern that despite widespread coverage in newspapers, these illegal shops were still operating on the roadside.

The Case is now listed on 23.04.2024 for further hearing.

Case Title: Shyamanand Pandey versus The State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Click Here To Read Order Dt. 11.03.2024

Click Here To Read Order Dt. 03.04.2024