On meat ban, SC seeks tolerance
NOT MINCING WORDS Can’t force it down one’s throat, court says as it rejects plea against Bombay HC stay
Calling for tolerance, the Supreme Court on Thursday refused to interfere with a Bombay high court interim order allowing the sale of meat during the Jain festival of Paryushan while observing that “these are not issues that can be forced down one’s throat”.
The high court had on Monday stayed the Maharashtra government’s decision to ban meat sale on certain days of the eight-day Jain fasting period.
When the petitioner, a Jain religious trust, sought re-imposition of the ban on grounds of compassion towards animals, the top court said “compassion towards animals does not have to be observed on festival days only” but should be forever.
The Mumbai meat ban had snowballed into a major controversy — and led to copycat orders in other states and cities — before it was curtailed to two days, September 10 and 17. But on Monday, the high court had stayed the ban. As proceedings began on Thursday, the final day of the ban, the Supreme Court expressed reluctance to stay the high court order, pointing out, “Half a day has already gone.”
But in the two-hour-long hearing that followed, the bench of justices TS Thakur and Kurian Joseph called for “a spirit of tolerance and accommodation”.
When the counsel for the petitioner argued that the issue involved the religious beliefs of a community, justice Thakur said, “There has to be tolerance and accommodation.”
“It (whipping up religious sentiments) is happening throughout the country and the world. One may agree or not. One may agree to be a vegetarian or not. The spirit of tolerance has to be inculcated.”
Quoting a couplet of legendary poet Kabir — and translating it into English for the benefit of his colleague on the bench and the lawyers present — justice Thakur said, “Even good teachings cannot be forced upon others, and people reap what they sow.”
Pointing out that the Bombay HC had given an elaborate order after considering all aspects of the law, the SC said, “We make it clear that we have not made any observations on the merits of the case. It would be open for the petitioner to approach the HC, which would decide the plea within six months.”