Madras High Court Issues Guidelines For Transporting Cattles, Says Their Safety And Well-Being Should Be Ensured

Justice Nirmal Kumar noted that transporting cattle was a careful process that required strict adherence to the Animal Welfare Regulations, proper vehicle equipment, and ensuring the cattle's health and safety during the journey.

The court directed the transporters to ensure that there is adequate space to stand, lie down and turn around. The court also stated that the safety of the cattle should be ensured while loading and unloading the cattle, in order to prevent injury and stress. For this, the court said that the ramps and loading docks should be designed to prevent the cattle from slipping or falling.

The court also added that during transit, the cattle must be provided ventilation, and a warm temperature should be ensured inside the containers. The court remarked that in case of long transit, the cattle should be provided food and water in the interregnum period of pick-up and drop points. The court added that the cattle should be checked for any distress, injury or illness and if so, should be immediately removed from the vehicle and given treatment.

The court further directed that the purchasers/transporters should carry proper documents from the respective officers while transporting the cattle and in case of a long journey, a certificate should also be obtained on how long and how far the cattle could be transported. The court added that after arriving at the destination also, the cattle must be monitored for any signs of injury and must be taken care.

The court was hearing a petition filed by cattle owners seeking interim custody of their cattle which were confiscated by the police on complaints by the Almighty Animal Care Trust and the Gau Raksha Dal. The complainants had complained to the police that the cattle were being transported illegally in container lorries. When these three lorries were intercepted, it contained 22 cattle & 2 calves, 21 cattle and 74 cattle, respectively. On inquiry, the lorry drivers informed the cattle were being taken to Kerala for slaughter. Subsequently, the cattle were rescued and shifted to private shelters. Cases were registered against the vehicle owners for offenses under Section 429 of IPC read with Sections 11(1)(a), 11(1)(d) & 4 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and Section 325 BNS Act r/w Section 11(1)(a), 11(1)(b), 11(1)(d), 11(1)(e) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

The petitioners argued that the cattle were purchased for agricultural activities and for breeding purposes and were being transported from Andhra Pradesh to Theni Cumbum and Pollachi through Container Lorries with valid certificates. It was submitted that they had purchased the cattle by paying the necessary cess to the Agriculture Market Committee and were provided water and fodder to prevent them from hunger and with proper ventilation.

The petitioners also argued that the cattle should not have been sent to the private barns without the orders of the Magistrate. It was argued that the private barns were not recognized by the Government to keep the cattle under their custody. The petitioners also questioned the Magistrate's order and argued that the Magistrate had passed the order without application of mind and without personal inspection.

The Government and the defacto complainants on the hand supported the Magistrate's refusal to grant interim custody. It was argued that the cattle was transported in an inhuman manner and was transported to Kerala for slaughter illegally. It was pointed out that the cattle were less than 10 years of age and were jam-packed in vehicles with less probability of food, water, and air violating the transport regulations. It was also submitted that in order to keep the cattle awake, green chilies were placed in their eyes due to which they sustained numerous injuries.

It was also pointed out that though the petitioners claimed that the cattle were transported for breeding, as per the report of the veterinary doctor, all cattle except for one had been castrated which made it impossible to breed. It was further submitted that though the petitioners submitted the Cess receipt from the Agricultural Market Committee and the Certificates issued under Rule 96 of the Transportation of Animal Rules, 2001, these were not issued to the police at the time of interception and seemed to have been obtained subsequently.

The court was satisfied that there was a violation of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Transport of Animal Rules, 1978. The court noted that the rules clearly provided that the goods vehicle could carry only six cattle with a valid certificate by a qualified Veterinary Surgeon but in the present case, none of the rules was followed.

"No doubt, in the case on hand, large number of Cattle transported by the petitioners in an inhumane manner and transporting in the Container Lorries...Absolutely, nothing has been followed in this case and the trial Courts are right in dismissing the petitions filed by the Petitioners, which needs no interference. The present arrangement of maintaining the Cattle in the respective Khosala and to be continued till the trial is completed and final orders passed entrusting custody of Cattle," the court said. 

Thus, the court opined that the trial court's order did not need interference and dismissed the pleas.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. R. John Sathiyan Senior Counsel For Mr. A. Thameem Mohideen

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. A. Damodaran Addl. Public Prosecutor, Mr. Sathish Parasaran Senior Counsel For Mr. Rahul Balaji, Ms. Madhumitha. J

Case Title: Abbas Manthiri v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 46

Case No: Crl.RC.1421 of 2024