HC declines to stay BMC’s temporary slaughter permissions for Bakri Eid

Bombay HC declines to stay BMC's permission for animal slaughter on Bakri Eid at private shops and markets. Trust challenged but failed to file necessary application.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Tuesday declined to stay the permission granted by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to 67 private shops and 47 municipal markets for slaughtering animals on Bakri Eid.

HT Image

A division bench of justice MS Sonak and justice Kamal Khata was hearing a petition filed by Jiv Maitri Trust, an NGO working for animal and environmental welfare, challenging the civic body’s communication on May 29, allowing private establishments to slaughter animals for Bakri Eid.

The trust sought an urgent listing, but the bench said that the petitioners failed to file the necessary application for such relief.

The trust had initially approached the high court in 2018, challenging the BMC’s annual issuance of no-objection certificates (NOCs) for animal slaughter during festive seasons or special ceremonies, arguing these permissions violated central regulations such as the Food Safety and Standards (Licensing and Registering of Food Business) Regulations, the Environment (Protection) Act, and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The court had previously directed the establishment of a grievance forum to report animal slaughter during festivals.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the BMC policy prohibits slaughtering at public places like bus stops and airports. The challenged BMC communication permitted slaughtering at mutton shops, which were not included in the policy, and some were located near airports.

The counsel argued that the BMC’s policy requires permission through a notice 30 days in advance and claimed the communication violated this policy.

Representing the BMC, senior advocate Milind Sathe argued that such permissions are routinely granted on the eve of festivals. Sathe noted that the current communication only permitted slaughtering at 67 private shops and 47 municipal markets for three days, from June 17 to 19. He also mentioned that the petitioner had granted similar permissions to 72 establishments previously, which went unchallenged.

The court emphasised that the petitioner sought interim relief without formally applying. “The petitioner seeks interim relief regarding the communication given by BMC on May 29, 2024. The counsel for the petitioner submits urgently for seeking interim relief based on a precipice,” the court noted. Precipice is a written request, addressed to a court, for a writ to be produced specifying the contents of the writ.

“We are unsure if seeking interim relief in a pending case is appropriate. We granted production in morning sessions when we were under the impression that application for IA is filed and production for the same is sought,” the court added.

Further, the bench pointed out that the petitioner did not amend their petition to challenge the latest BMC communication. Without such an amendment, pressing for interim relief was deemed inappropriate.

Meanwhile, a similar Public Interest Litigation filed by Akhil Bharat Krishi Goseva Sangh is pending before a bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyay and Justice Amit Borkar.