Write Comment     |     E-Mail To a Friend     |     Facebook     |     Twitter     |     Print

* It empowers a cop, not below the rank of SI, to barge into your home or workplace and arrest you on the merest suspicion that you are in possession of beef * No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings can be initiated against the cop as he has ‘acted in good faith’

If the Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Bill, 2010, as envisaged by the BJP government in the state, goes on to become a law, it could turn out to be as draconian as any dreaded anti-terror Act.

The anti-cattle slaughter bill has a provision which empowers a police officer, not below the rank of sub-inspector, to barge into your home or workplace and arrest you on the merest suspicion that you are in possession of beef. Your vehicle could be confiscated if the police suspect you are transporting cattle for slaughter. Unlike other laws based on natural justice, the onus would be on you to prove you are not guilty. And while you are at it, your confiscated property could be auctioned away.

To cap it all, no action — no suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings — can be initiated against the police for they have “acted in good faith.” So, there is no question of compensation for harassment if any accused manages to prove his/her innocence.     

The state not just wants to ban eating of beef. It wants to make even possession of beef illegal. President Pratibha Patil has sent back the bill to the state, but the government says the Rashtra-pati Bhavan’s sole objection is to buffalo being included in the list of cattle that cannot be slaughtered. The state will happily strike out buffalo from the forbidden list, and is confident that the Bill will face no further hurdles.

For slaughtering cattle, the bill recommends up to seven years’ imprisonment. It aims to replace the 1964 Act of prevention of cow slaughter, which prescribed six months’ jail term for killing a cow less than 12 years old. In fact, the new Bill replaces ‘cow’ with ‘cattle’. The BJP-ruled states of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh too have passed similar laws, but they are less stringent and have not made possession of beef illegal.
 

IT’S DRACONIAN: EXPERTS
Civil rights activists and legal luminaries fear it would be a travesty of justice if the bill goes on to become a law, with the police given sweeping powers. Prof S Japhet, director at the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive  Policy, NLSIU, says, “As a preventive measure, the bill allows search and seizure, which are going to be an impingement upon right to privacy as they would involve searching your kitchen, dining room and other places, such as restaurants and eateries. It could unleash terror among alleged beef eaters anytime, anywhere.”

Supreme Court advocate KV Dhananjay says, “Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, prescribes a punishment of two years when an individual is killed by the negligent act of another human being. All the accused in the Bhopal gas tragedy were charged under this provision and convicted for just two years. So what is the justification of imposing seven years’ jail term for killing a cow?”
 

THOU SHALL NOT KEEP
Shiva Sundar of Komu Souharda Vedike and Alternate Law Forum says, “Even in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, where similar laws have been passed, possession of beef is not a crime. The president has suggested that buffalo be kept out. But when you are caught with beef, how would the police determine if it is from a cow, oxen or buffalo? The accused will have to wait till forensic reports are obtained. Only a first-class magistrate can try these cases at taluks and district headquarters. The accused will have to employ a lawyer and wait for the police to complete the formalities.”
 

THOU SHALL NOT EAT
The proposed law challenges eating habits of a large number of people — minorities in particular. Japhet says, “Beef, buffalo-eating is culturally acceptable or suitable to many, such as the Dalits, tribes living in the North-East, Muslims, Christians, etc. The concept of banning beef is a blow to their rights."
 

THOU SHALL NOT SELL
Apart from targeting beef-eaters, the Bill is harsh on farmers. “What does a farmer do with old cattle which can neither be used for ploughing, nor can produce milk? He sells them and buy new ones. But the bill makes it mandatory that he hands them over to a goshala and pay fee for maintenance. This is ridiculous. You cut a farmer’s economic chain and when he does not have money to feed himself, you make him pay to look after his cattle that would have brought him some money. Even the president has not commented on this issue. Forget the minorities whose eating habits will be affected. This bill will affect farmers more,” Sundar says.
 

LOOPHOLES
There are other loopholes in the bill which could hurt liberties further. “The legislature should have taken into account that beef sale and consumption are legal in the neighbouring states.” Sundar says. “Tourists or any person arriving from other states may bring in beef. The proposed law does not make allowances for such a situation. So, can a person in possession of beef, legally slaughtered for consumption in another state, be arrested by the cops? What about dead cattle? Can you eat them after they die natural death? The bill is silent on these issues.”
Also, the bill does not consider the case of male calf of a mixed-breed cattle. “What can it be used for? It has only meat value. But who will pay for looking after it until it dies? The state seems to have no idea,” Sundar adds.
 

WHY MINCE WORDS?
Dhananjay says the government should have been bold enough to admit its true intention. “It is a law of pretence. There was no need for the state to hide its intentions. Hindus being the predominant majority in India, it is legally acceptable that states or the Centre will devise laws to protect and preserve the core and ancient religious belief of the Hindus. If the government can show that cow slaughter is against the Hindu faith, there is no need to argue legally that cow preservation helps mankind. The argument should be straight, simple and honest. The state could have clearly said that the law against cow slaughter is primarily meant to protect the ancient and religious belief of the Hindus.”

‘Loaded and flawed’
» For slaughtering cattle, the bill recommends up to 7 years’ imprisonment
 
» Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh too have passed similar laws, but possession of beef is not illegal there
 
» The state will comply with the Prez’s request that buffalo be left out of the forbidden list. But if one is caught with beef, how would a cop know if the meat has come from a cow, buffalo or oxen?