The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) on Friday withdrew its ban on slaughter and
sale of meat for two days, following widespread protests and also criticism from the Bombay High Court (HC) which said such restrictions cannot be imposed in a city like Mumbai.
Distancing itself from the controversial ban, the Maharashtra BJP said the controversy over meat ban during Paryushan was politically motivated and was aimed at maligning the party’s image, as the State Government had nothing to do with the decision.
Meanwhile, more BJP-ruled States joined the
meat ban bandwagon on Friday. In Ahmedabad, Police Commissioner Shivanand Jha issued an order banning slaughter of animals for a week during the Jain fasting period and Chhattisgarh banned the sale of meat till September 17.
A day after the Jammu & Kashmir HC directed the State Government to enforce an existing order against beef eating in the State, massive protests erupted in several parts of Kashmir Valley , including old Srinagar city to protest the HC’s direction to police and civil administration to enforce ban on sale and possession of beef.
The authorities put several separatist leaders under house detention to prevent massive demonstrations. The separatists have called for a shutdown on Saturday even as several bovines were publicly slaughtered in defiance of the court order.
Although there was no word from the Government on the contentious issue, Opposition National Conference (NC) has decided to consult legal and constitutional experts to find legal recourse for pre-empting such controversies in future. Several other mainstream leaders have also criticised the beef ban imposition.
A Division Bench of State HC comprising Justices Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Janak Raj Kotwal ordered implementation of a law existing in Ranbir Panel Code (RPC) that bans sale and possession of beef in Jammu & Kashmir. The verdict came while in response to a Public Interest litigation (PIl) seeking directions on slaughtering or killing of bovines to be declared an offence punishable under Section 298-A and possession of such slaughtered animal an act punishable under Section 298-B of the RPC.
Meanwhile, giving in to pressure, the MCGM told the Bombay HC that it has decided to withdraw its September 1 circular imposing a ban on slaughter as well as sale of mutton and chicken in the city on September 13 and 18 during Paryushan, the Jain festival, “keeping public interest and the sentiments of Mumbaikars in mind”.
While the civic body had announced the ban for September 13 and 18, the State Government had banned it for September 10 and 17. The civic body’s decision would mean that the city would now go without meat only on September 17.
On the first day of the ban on Thursday, Shiv Sena and Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) openly defied the measure with its workers selling chicken in the busy Dadar area.
The Opposition Congress and NCP also resented the ban, accusing the ruling BJP of pressing it with political motives.
The MCGM, where Shiv Sena and the BJP share power, held a special council session on Friday to discuss the vexed issue and adopted a unanimous resolution for withdrawal of the ban.
The BJP, though miffed at the ally taking it to the streets, supported the resolution along with other parties in the council.
later, the MCGM counsel informed the Bombay High Court of the decision during the hearing of a petition filed by Bombay Mutton Dealers Association challenging the ban.
The court, which on Thursday took a critical note of the order and sought the State’s response on it, made some sharp observations on Friday as well, against the civic body and the Government holding that such a restriction could not be imposed in a city like Mumbai.
“There is a progressive look attached with Mumbai. Such decisions are regressive in nature. What to eat is an individual choice. How can you restrict thatIJ” the court said.
The court sought to know the rationale behind permitting sale of fish, seafood and eggs.
“How are fish and eggs differentIJ Killing them is not violentIJ What is the rationale behind such a decisionIJ” it asked.
To this, Advocate General Anil Singh said “fish dies the moment it is taken out of water. Hence, there is no death due to slaughter.”
Suggesting that the Government formulate a uniform policy on the ban, the court sought to know “What is the idea of having the ban on some days and allowing slaughter and sale of meat on other daysIJ Is it that there is no sentiment on one day and the next day you are filled with sentimentIJ What is the idea behind thisIJ” and posted the matter for orders on September 14.
Meanwhile, addressing a Press conference, Maharashtra BJP spokesperson Madhav Bhandari said the decision to ban the sale of meat during the period had been taken by the respective civic bodies in Mumbai and the neighbouring Mira Bhaynder and Navi Mumbai.
“BJP has nothing to do with it. Municipal corporations are autonomous bodies under the 74th Constitutional amendment. The State Government does not interfere in the day-to-day functioning of the local body,” he said.
Bhandari also pointed out that this temporary ban was being imposed since 1964 in the State.
In New Delhi, stepping up the offensive against the BJP the Congress alleged “fascism” over the meat ban in some States.
“Fascism that is starting from the top is going down the line. The Government is now getting into what someone will eat or wear. What else is fascismIJ,” senior party leader Kapil Sibal told reporters at the AICC briefing.
Taking strong objection to the meat ban left parties also termed it as violation of fundamental rights and asked Governments to ensure they don’t dictate what a person should eat.
left parties accused RSS of trying to impose Hindutva values on other communities, an idea which they likened to “cultural fascism”.
“CPI is of the opinion that States should not dictate what a person should eat and when to consume. Such type of acts based with narrow partisan attitude with definite political motives creates social disharmony. The Governments must refrain from such acts,” CPI General Secretary Sudhakar Reddy said in a statement.