Gauhati High Court quashes Nagaland government’s ban on dog meat

The judgement was passed after Justice Marli Vankun heard a petition by three persons who supplied and sold dog and dog meat in Nagaland before the ban was enforced via the notification on July 4, 2020.

June 06, 2023 03:39 pm | Updated 06:52 pm IST - GUWAHATI

A view of the Gauhati High Court. File

A view of the Gauhati High Court. File | Photo Credit: PTI

The Kohima Bench of the Gauhati High Court has quashed a three-year-old Nagaland government order that put a blanket ban on the commercial import, trading of dogs and sale of dog meat in markets and dine-in restaurants.

The judgement was passed on June 2 after Justice Marli Vankun heard a petition by three persons who supplied and sold dog and dog meat in Nagaland before the ban was enforced via the notification on July 4, 2020.

Also Read | The politics of dog meat ban in Nagaland

The respondents included Nagaland’s Chief Secretary, Food Safety Commissioner and the Department of Health and Family Welfare, the Kohima Municipal Council, People For Animals and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).

The court observed that the main issue for consideration was whether the State government rightly issued the impugned notification in pursuance of an August 6, 2014, circular from the FSSAI citing the definition of ‘animals’, ‘carcass’, and ‘meat’ under a relevant regulation of 2011.

The court pointed out that canine or dogs have not been mentioned under the definition of ‘animals’ and said it was “not surprising” since the “very idea of consuming dog meat is alien” to the country barring some parts of the northeast.

Observing that consumption of dog meat appears to be an accepted norm and food amongst the Nagas even in modern times, the court said the impugned notification of July 4, 2020, was liable to be set aside even though it was said to have been passed in accordance with a Cabinet decision.

This was because the notification was issued without “there being any law passed by the legislation in relation to the trade and consumption of dog meat”. The court also said the Chief Secretary was not the appropriate authority to issue the impugned ban order.

The court further observed that the petitioners had been earning their livelihoods by transporting dogs and selling dog meat.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.