Animal life should also be treated with dignity

Dr. Satywan Saurabh

(satywansaurabh333@gmail.com)

By amending the penal code, penalties were increased for causing un
necessary pain or suffering to animals and for killing or seriously ill-treating animals. It discusses various forms of cruelty, exceptions, and where any cruelty to a suffering animal involves killing it, to save it from further suffering. The legislative intent of the Act is to “prevent the causing of unnecessary pain or suffering to animals.” The Animal Welfare Board of India was established in 1962 under Section 4 of the Act. This Act provides for punishment for causing unnecessary cruelty and suffering to animals. This Act defines animals and various forms of animals. In the case of the first offence, a fine shall not be less than ten rupees but may extend to fifty rupees. In the case of a second or subsequent offence committed within three years of the previous offence, the fine shall not be less than twenty-five rupees. Which may be punished with a fine that may extend to one hundred rupees, with imprisonment for a term that may extend to three months, or with both. It provides guidelines regarding experimentation on animals for scientific purposes. The Act establishes provisions relating to the exhibition of performing animals and offences committed against performing animals.

Retribution (punishment given to avenge the crime committed), deterrence (punishment given to deter the criminal and the general public from committing such crimes in the future), Reform or rehabilitation (to improve and shape the future behaviour of the riminal). The poor implementation of the law and the low penalties it prescribes make the PCA Act appear extremely ineffective. Most of the offences under the Act are bailable (the accused can seek bail from the police as a matter of right), non-cognizable (which means the police can neither file a First Information Report nor investigate without express permission), or The amount prescribed as a fine under the PCA Act is the same as that prescribed in its predecessor, the PCA Act 1890. The fine is insignificant (in many cases, less than Rs 10), as it has not been amended in over 130 years. The law is written in such a way that the court dealing with the case has the discretion to choose between imposing imprisonment or a fine on the accused.

This allows perpetrators of animal cruelty to get away with the most cruel forms of animal cruelty by simply paying a fine, in most cases. The law itself makes no provision for ‘community service’ such as volunteering at an animal shelter, as a punishment, which could potentially reform offenders. The inclusion of five fundamental freedoms for animals, an increase in punishments and the amount of money to be paid as fines for various offenses, and the addition of new cognizable offences are two options for the court dealing with animal cruelty cases in the draft bill. The provision of imprisonment and fines has been continued.

Fundamental rights have been provided to animals. Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) are given to individuals. “Person” means a human being or an association of human beings, such as a corporation, partnership, trust, etc. Article 48 Prohibiting the slaughter of cows, calves, and other milch and draft cattle and improving their breed Article 48A Protection and improvement of the environment And to protect forests and wildlife, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA Act) of 1960 criminalises a variety of acts causing cruelty to animals. It allows the use of animals for experiments to ensure medical advancements.

Even if the draft bill becomes law, it would still be possible for criminals to pay nominal fines and avoid imprisonment for some acts of extreme cruelty. Even with its limitations, the enactment of the draft bill could be a major step forward for animal law in India. “India should set a great example for all the countries in the world. We should set an example, not because I think we are superior, but because we have talked about nonviolence far more than any other country. So the more we talk about it, the greater the responsibility to put it into practice so that the amendment to the PCA Act (1960) can finally see the light of day.

The right in Article 21 is conferred only on human beings: but the expanded meaning of the word “life,” now including the right against disturbance of the basic environment, must mean that animal life also has “intrinsic value, respect, and dignity” and should be treated accordingly. There is no doubt that the Constitution protects only the rights of human beings, but the word “life” is today understood to mean much more than mere existence; it means an existence that allows us, among other things, to live in a clean and healthy environment.