Tamil Nadu moves SC against Madras HC's ban on cow slaughter, says it ‘contradicts existing state laws’, details
Total Views |
On Wednesday, July 1, the Tamil Nadu government moved the Supreme Court against a Madras High Court order that imposed a blanket ban on cow slaughter across the state, contending that the order runs contrary to existing state legislation.
_202607011413025553_H@@IGHT_400_W@@IDTH_700.jpg "Tamil Nadu")
The case originated from a PIL filed on May 27, a day before Bakrid, by K Surya Prasanth, general secretary of Hindu Makkal Katchi, before a bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayan. Prasanth's plea had sought to confine cow slaughter to designated locations, but the High Court went further, banning the slaughter of cows and calves anywhere in the state.
The Tamil Nadu government maintained that judicial orders cannot supersede or conflict with existing statutory law, arguing that the High Court's ruling is at odds with the 1958 Act, which allows the slaughter of specific categories of cows under defined conditions.
The petition also disputes the High Court's finding that authorities had acknowledged cows were being, or were likely to be, slaughtered in public places. The state government said this contradicts its own position, noting that police had stated in their counter-affidavit that preventive steps were already in place to stop public slaughter, and that any ritual sacrifice would occur only in enclosed, non-public settings, according to Live Law.
According to Live Law, the state argued that the High Court's May 27 order conflicts with the Tamil Nadu Animal Preservation Act, 1958, which permits the slaughter of cows over 10 years old that are no longer fit for work or breeding, provided a certificate is obtained from the competent authority. The government also pointed to other laws regulating animal slaughter: the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960; the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Slaughter House) Rules, 2001; the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998; and the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules, 2023, noting that these lay down conditions for slaughter rather than prohibiting it outright. Per Live Law, the state contended that by ordering a complete ban, the High Court had overstepped the boundaries set by legislation.
The case originated from a PIL filed on May 27, a day before Bakrid, by K Surya Prasanth, general secretary of Hindu Makkal Katchi, before a bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice V Lakshminarayan. Prasanth's plea had sought to confine cow slaughter to designated locations, but the High Court went further, banning the slaughter of cows and calves anywhere in the state.
In issuing its order, the High Court cited a government order suggesting that a ban would boost milk production and support the rural economy, and referenced Supreme Court precedent holding that cow slaughter is not an essential religious practice tied to Bakrid, Live Law reported.
Tamil Nadu Government has approached the Supreme Court challenging the May 27 order of the Madras High Court which imposed a blanket ban on the slaughter of cows. pic.twitter.com/oIenCGXd14
— ANI (@ANI) July 1, 2026
The Tamil Nadu government maintained that judicial orders cannot supersede or conflict with existing statutory law, arguing that the High Court's ruling is at odds with the 1958 Act, which allows the slaughter of specific categories of cows under defined conditions.
In its Special Leave Petition, the state pointed out that the original PIL was narrowly focused on preventing cow slaughter in public spaces during Bakrid in Coimbatore. It argued that the Division Bench, however, broadened the scope of the case well beyond what was sought, imposing what the state called an "absolute and blanket ban", even extending to designated slaughterhouses, despite this relief never having been requested by the petitioner. The state noted an internal contradiction in the judgment: while the High Court's direction to confine slaughter to designated areas was appropriate, the blanket ban undercuts that same reasoning.
The petition also disputes the High Court's finding that authorities had acknowledged cows were being, or were likely to be, slaughtered in public places. The state government said this contradicts its own position, noting that police had stated in their counter-affidavit that preventive steps were already in place to stop public slaughter, and that any ritual sacrifice would occur only in enclosed, non-public settings, according to Live Law.