The Supreme Court has raised uncomfortable questions about the way society treats cattle, pointing to what it described as a striking contradiction: animals are often abandoned once they cease to serve an economic purpose, yet strong objections arise when those same animals are used as a source of food.
The remarks came from a Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh while dealing with the growing problem of stray cattle on roads and highways and considering measures that governments could adopt to tackle the issue.
According to the Court, those who choose to rear animals bear a moral responsibility to care for them throughout their lives. However, the judges acknowledged that reality often falls far short of that ideal.
“In a perfect world, animals would never be discarded after their utility declines. But society functions in a flawed human world,” the Bench observed, noting that countless cattle are left to wander unattended after they stop generating income for their owners.
The Court highlighted what it saw as a paradox in public attitudes. On one hand, animals are abandoned and left exposed to accidents and hardship on roads. On the other, there is outrage when they are consumed for sustenance. The judges remarked that this contradiction reflects the inconsistencies embedded in society’s approach to animal welfare.
Drawing a distinction between pets and livestock, the Bench observed that cattle found roaming on highways are usually raised for specific economic reasons. Once milk production falls or agricultural utility diminishes, many owners simply let the animals loose.
The judges accepted that small farmers and dairy owners may struggle financially to maintain non-productive cattle. Nevertheless, they stressed that abandonment cannot be justified as a solution. Instead, owners intending to part with such animals should ensure that they are safely transferred to authorised shelters.
The Court also pointed out that although most States have enacted laws restricting cattle slaughter and providing for their protection, implementation on the ground remains weak.
The observations formed part of a judgment arising from a compensation claim filed by the widow of a man who died after being attacked by a stray bull in Sangrur, Punjab, in 2007. Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court awarded the widow ₹15 lakh in compensation and used the case to address the broader dangers posed by stray cattle.
Describing cattle-related accidents as a serious public safety issue, the Bench observed that such incidents are becoming increasingly common. The judges remarked that roads and highways are not meant to function as resting places for cattle or “natural speed breakers.”
Referring to government data, the Court noted that animal-related accidents have claimed more than 1,300 lives annually in recent years.
To confront the problem, the Supreme Court recommended several measures, including stricter enforcement of existing laws, mandatory tagging of cattle, digital tracking systems, accountability for owners abandoning animals, compensation mechanisms for accident victims, and the appointment of nodal officers to supervise shelters and maintain records.
The Court directed that copies of the judgment be circulated to the Centre and all States for appropriate action.
