Earlier Directions Permitting Cockfight Contrary To Law: Madras High Court
|The Madras High Court was considering a Review Application whereby the applicant sought revisitation of an order passed by a Coordinate Division Bench.
The Madras High Court has clarified that the earlier directions issued by a Coordinate Division Bench permitting cockfight are contrary to law and should not act as a precedent.
The High Court was considering a Review Application whereby the applicant sought revisitation of the order passed by a Coordinate Division Bench on May 17, 2017, regarding the manner in which the cockfight should be permitted.
In the order under challenge, the Authorities were directed to give permission to a litigant to conduct cockfight on June 10, 2017 and June 11, 2017, subject to certain conditions.
Reference was made to Sections 3(2), 11 and 28 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, wherein cockfights are held to be illegal and impermissible under law.
The Bench comprising Justice C.V. Karthikeyan and Justice R. Sakthivel held, “In view of the fact that the Statute prohibits such an event from taking place, we would allow the review application and hold that the directions issued by the Division Bench are contrary to law and totally unwarranted and should not act as a precedent in any application seeking permission to conduct cock fight in future.”
Addl. Government Pleader represented the Petitioner.
With such observations and findings, the Bench dismissed the Revision application.
Cause Title: The District Collector v. G. Manickam (Neutral Citation: 2026:MHC:3501)