Mumbai meat ban during Jain festival: Resolve issue amicably, says HC
The representatives of all the parties and communities should sit together and work out an amicable solution, and the state and the corporation to come out with a proper policy, said a bench of judges.mumbai Updated: May 13, 2017 18:35 IST
The Bombay high court has said that all stakeholders should sit together and resolve the issue of meat ban during Paryurshan Parva, the annual holy festival of the Jain community.
“It would be appropriate for the representatives of all the parties and communities to sit together and work out an amicable solution, and the state government and the corporation to come out with a proper policy,” said the division bench of justice Anoop Mohta and justice Ravindra Ghuge, and granted the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the state six weeks.
The observation came during the hearing of a petition filed by the Bombay Mutton Dealers Association challenging notifications issued by the state and the BMC to keep Deonar abattoir and other meat shops across the city closed on some days during the Paryurshan Parva in 2015.
The state had directed the Deonar abattoir to remain closed, and said that there should be no sale of meat on September 10 and 17, 2015. The BMC had also issued a circular ordering the Deonar abattoir to remain closed and banned the sale of meat on two additional days – September 13 and 18, thus keeping the abattoir and the meat shops closed on effectively for four days in September 2015.
Acting on the petition, on September 14, 2015, the high court had stayed implementation of the notifications and the circulars issued by the state government and the BMC, saying “merely to appease one section of the society, the personal dietary choices of the public at large cannot not be affected.”
“The action of the state and the corporation to impose upon the people at large and to make certain foods unavailable in the market at the instance of a section of the society is something that we are unable to fathom,” the bench headed by justice Mohta had said.
It had added, “What one eats is his own business and it cannot extend to what others eat. In our view, the restrictions imposed by respondents (state and the BMC) are unreasonable and suffer from the vice of arbitrariness and discrimination, and would violate the fundamental rights of the petitioners (mutton dealers) as well as the general public.”