MOHD. HANIF QUARESHI & OTHERS versus THE STATE OF BIHAR

MOHD. HANIF QUARESHI & OTHERS versus THE STATE OF BIHAR

A total ban on slaughter of cows of all ages and calves of cows and buffaloes is reasonable and valid. A total ban on slaughter of she-buffaloes, breeding bulls and working bullocks is valid only while they are useful as milch or draught animals. A total ban after they are no longer useful is not justified as reasonable restriction in public interest and violates Article 19(1)(g).

Parties
Petitioner: Mohd. Hanif Quareshi & Others; Respondent: The State of Bihar; Respondent: The State of Bombay; Respondent: The State of Madhya Pradesh; Respondent: The State of Uttar Pradesh
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 April 1958
Procedural Posture
Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petitions partly allowed
Legal Topics
Reasonable Restrictions, Ban on Cow Slaughter, Article 48, Article 14, Article 19(1)(g), Article 25

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohd. Hanif Quareshi & Others

Petitioner

The State of Bihar

Respondent

The State of Bombay

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Respondent

The State of Uttar Pradesh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution / Final Judgment

  1. 1 Whether total ban on slaughter of cattle is constitutional
  2. 2 Whether the impugned Acts violate fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 25
  3. 3 Whether Directive Principles in Article 48 can override fundamental rights

Ratio Decidendi

A total ban on slaughter of cows of all ages and calves of cows and buffaloes is reasonable and valid. A total ban on slaughter of she-buffaloes, breeding bulls and working bullocks is valid only while they are useful as milch or draught animals. A total ban after they are no longer useful is not justified as reasonable restriction in public interest and violates Article 19(1)(g).

Court Disposition

Petitions partly allowed

Orders

  • Respondent States directed not to enforce their respective Acts to the extent declared void by the Court.
  • Each party to bear its own costs.