In Brief
The Court reviewed petitions against an earlier judgment striking down Tamil Nadu's Jallikattu Act as unconstitutional. Tamil Nadu argued the Act regulated—not encouraged—cruelty to bulls and was a socio-cultural practice with religious roots deserving constitutional protection. The Court upheld the earlier decision: Jallikattu's taming of bulls directly contradicts the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, which covers the entire field of animal welfare under the Concurrent List. Both laws cannot co-exist; they are fundamentally inconsistent. Jallikattu has no valid connection to freedom of religion. The petition was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.