Meat ban cannot be forced down anybody’s throat, said the Supreme Court on Thursday sending a terse reminder to States to encourage a spirit of tolerance on these matters as sensitivities of various people are involved.
After the Maharashtra Government ordered closure of abattoirs for two days that mark the Jain festival of Paryushan, Bombay Mutton Dealers’ Association obtained a stay from the Bombay High Court allowing sale of meat to continue as usual. Upset by the interim order of the HC, a Jain religious trust approached the apex court to state that the spirit behind the Government ban, prevalent since 2004, was to respect the Jain principle of “compassion for the living”.
The Bench of Justices TS Thakur and Kurian Joseph said, “Compassion is not to be observed only on festival days but throughout the year.” The Bench was of the view that such a ban was also not practical. “There are people doing business in selling packaged meat. It will be difficult to enforce the ban.”
Advocate Manish Singhvi, who appeared for the Jain community, felt that a beginning had to be made somewhere and over the years (since 2004) there was never any problem. Moreover, the community claimed that the ban does not regulate food habits, as perceived by the High Court, but only dealt with sale of meat on some prescribed dates, a principle which has been upheld in the past by various Supreme Court orders.
With the matter still pending in the HC, the court did not wish to comment on merits of the case. However, the Bench observed, “Such decisions can’t be forced down somebody’s throat…We can assure you that this ban does not really matter. There must be a spirit of tolerance as such decision involves various sensitivities that require to be seen with an enlightened and reformed mind.”
It quoted a couplet of Kabir, “Kabira teri jhompri gal katiyan ke paas; Jo karenge so bharenge, to kyun bhayo udaas” that explained the poet’s deep spiritual insight that allowed him to keep himself pure despite his house being situated in a butcher’s colony.
The Court allowed the appeal to be withdrawn and granted permission to the Jain trust to approach the HC and request for early disposal of the case. The Bench further requested the HC to decide on the ban one way or the other, preferably within six months.