The Supreme Court today commenced the hearing in the Supreme Court seeking to ban the Jallikattu.
The Tamil Nadu Government passed the law to permit Jallikattu following the protests across Tamil Nadu.
"This tradition of culture and culture has been going on for over 2,500 years and has to be protected.
Jallikattu Animal Abuse Prevention Act, 1960 apply "the law kurippitappattullatuan the state of the law in 2014, the Supreme Court's ruling is located. Also, bulls persecution in order to justify the legislation that is in beta configuration, Animal Welfare Board and other entities of today's Supreme Court vica During ranai teruvittana.
Therefore, they demanded that the Tamil Nadu Government to abolish the Act and to impose interim prohibition on Jallikattu.
Attorney General Mukul Rothki, Senior Advocate on behalf of the Government of Tamil Nadu, pointed out that under Article 29 (1) of the Constitution insisted on securing cultural and cultural elements
"The Tamil Nadu government has enacted this law to protect traditional culture, so it is a constitutional requirement for constitutional amendment," he argued.
The Attorney General K. Chiranjeevi said that there is a section (1) of the Constitution to protect a particular people's heritage and culture. Q. Venugopal said that it would be questionable for Tamil Nadu as well.
The Supreme Court has said that a five-judge constitutional sessions will be examined and the interim ban will not be imposed on the jail.
The judges said that there will be no restriction on the Jallikattu in the next year.
The Tamil Nadu Government passed the law to permit Jallikattu following the protests across Tamil Nadu.
"This tradition of culture and culture has been going on for over 2,500 years and has to be protected.
Jallikattu Animal Abuse Prevention Act, 1960 apply "the law kurippitappattullatuan the state of the law in 2014, the Supreme Court's ruling is located. Also, bulls persecution in order to justify the legislation that is in beta configuration, Animal Welfare Board and other entities of today's Supreme Court vica During ranai teruvittana.
Therefore, they demanded that the Tamil Nadu Government to abolish the Act and to impose interim prohibition on Jallikattu.
Attorney General Mukul Rothki, Senior Advocate on behalf of the Government of Tamil Nadu, pointed out that under Article 29 (1) of the Constitution insisted on securing cultural and cultural elements
"The Tamil Nadu government has enacted this law to protect traditional culture, so it is a constitutional requirement for constitutional amendment," he argued.
The Attorney General K. Chiranjeevi said that there is a section (1) of the Constitution to protect a particular people's heritage and culture. Q. Venugopal said that it would be questionable for Tamil Nadu as well.
The Supreme Court has said that a five-judge constitutional sessions will be examined and the interim ban will not be imposed on the jail.
The judges said that there will be no restriction on the Jallikattu in the next year.
Comments
Post a Comment