DR. Ashok Kumar Mohapatra Moot Court Proposition

MOOT PROPOSITION
1. Indica being a secular country treat each and every religion with utmost reverence
and respect. In certain part of the territory of indica , animals are worshipped as God
as well.
2. Meanwhile for centuries, In indica the states of Ranthara and Dharmaja have been
celebrated for their vibrant cultural traditions, deeply rooted in their agrarian lifestyle
and religious beliefs. In these lands, the bull has always been revered not just as a
beast of burden, but as a symbol of strength, fertility, and prosperity. The Vardhani
Bull Races of Ranthara and the Govishaya Trampling Ritual of Dharmaja are two
such ancient practices where bulls play a central role in festivals that are said to honor
the earth and gods, seeking blessings for abundant crops and strong communities.
3. The Vardhani Bull Races date back over 500 years, originating as a form of
thanksgiving to the Rain Gods after the first harvest. In this event, prized buffaloes
race through flooded paddy fields, driven by whip-wielding jockeys standing on
wooden sledges. The festival serves as a display of agricultural pride and endurance,
but with the passage of time, concerns of cruelty have clouded this celebration. Bulls
are often beaten to increase their aggression, and subjected to gruelling physical
demands, leading to injuries and even death.
4. Similarly, in Dharmaja’s Govishaya Trampling Ritual, held the day after Diwali, the
spectacle of devotees laying on the ground for bulls to trample over them has gained
both reverence and notoriety. This ritual, seen as a purification act where sins are
trampled away, often leaves both bulls and humans gravely injured. The festival,
once a peaceful homage to deities, has now become a controversial spectacle,
criticized for the trauma it inflicts on the animals involved.
5. In Velakum, a village in the heart of Dharmaja, the Yuvatta Bull-Taming Ritual (akin
to Tamil Nadu’s Jallikattu) brings another level of intensity. Bulls are unleashed into
an arena where young men, vying for honor, attempt to tame the enraged animals.
These bulls, often provoked with irritants and sharp objects, fight back fiercely, with
numerous injuries and deaths reported over the years. The Yuvatta tradition is seen
as a test of bravery, but it too has been labelled as cruel by animal rights groups
6. In 2024, an investigative journalist, Arun Deshmukh, managed to infiltrate these

festivals and film the backstage brutality inflicted on the animals before the events.
His short documentary, uploaded on social media platforms, included distressing
footage of bulls being beaten, whipped, and tortured to make them more aggressive.
The clip, titled “Bulls of Sorrow,” went viral, leading to a massive social media storm
under the hashtag #TraditionOrTorture.
7. Outrage from animal rights activists poured in, demanding an immediate ban on these
rituals, while locals in both states rallied in defence of their traditions, declaring that
the video was an insult to their culture. Violent clashes erupted in major cities,
leading to injuries and widespread property damage.
8. As tensions rose, both the State Governments of Ranthara and Dharmaja imposed
Section 163 of the INSS, banning public gatherings in the affected regions. To curb
further escalation, they also implemented internet shutdowns to prevent the spread
of inflammatory content. Civil liberties groups criticized these measures, accusing
the government of suppressing free speech and using the internet bans as a way to
stifle dissent rather than addressing the core issue of animal cruelty.
9. In their defence, both state governments passed new legislation—the Ranthara Bull
Sports Regulation Act, 2024, and the Dharmaja Cultural Heritage Act, 2023—which
aimed to regulate these events while ensuring the continuation of their centuries-old
practices. They argued that these laws provided enough safeguards to prevent cruelty,
insisting that the festivals were essential to their cultural identity and religious
beliefs.
10. The viral video, along with mounting public pressure, led to the filing of multiple
Public Interest Litigations (PILs) in the High Courts of Ranthara, Dharmaja, and
Velakum, challenging the constitutionality of these rituals under the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. Animal rights organizations argued that the festivals
violated the Right to Life under Article 21 and Article 51A(g), which enshrines a
duty to show compassion towards all living creatures.
11. On the other side, local councils and cultural defenders filed counter-petitions,
claiming protection in Cultural and Educational Rights and Freedom of Religion.
They contended that banning these rituals would erode the cultural fabric of their
communities and disrespect their religious practices.
12. Meanwhile a PIL was also filed by one ngo People for animal before the supreme
court seeking a mandamus to the parliament to amend the law relating to Prevention
of Animal Cruelty Act, as they felt the provisions in the act are not sufficient to punish
and deter guilty persons and a draconian law since it has very minimum punishments
13. Recognizing the far-reaching consequences of the issue, the Attorney General of
India requested the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognizance and consolidate the
cases. The Court agreed, constituting a Seven-Judge Constitutional Bench to decide
on the constitutionality of the rituals and the broader implications for animal rights,
cultural preservation, and free speech and also the PIL filed by the NGO was clubbed
by the Supreme court since it arising out of same issues.
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
1. Whether the Ranthara Bull Sports Regulation Act, 2024 and the Dharmaja
Cultural Heritage Act, 2023, which regulates the Vardhani Bull Races,
Govishaya Trampling Ritual, and Yuvatta Bull-Taming Ritual, violate the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and violates the provisions of
constitution of indica.
2. Can the bull rituals in these states be protected as cultural rights, and do these
rights override the duty to prevent animal cruelty under Article 21?
3. Was the State Government’s decision to impose internet bans and censor viral
videos justifiable under Article 19(2) on the grounds of public order?
4. Was the imposition of Section 163 INSS in Ranthara and Dharmaja
proportionate, or did it amount to an abuse of power by suppressing legitimate
dissent and free expression?
5. Whether the provisions of Prevention of Animal cruelty Act , 1960 is sufficient

to address the cruelty on the animals and provides sufficient punishment and
require an amendment?
Note : Constitution of Indica and Indica Nya Surakhya Sahinta are Pari materia
to Constitution of India and BNSS
(The above issues are not mandatory and the participants have there liberty to frame
there own issues)-
DISCLAIMER
This proposition is a fictional narrative crafted to shed light on current societal issues.
It is not intended to mirror any real court proceedings or to disparage any religion. Any
resemblance, if found, is purely coincidental and unintentional. This proposition has
been drafted by Advocate Haraprasad Panda, the Moot Convenor of the Dr. Ashok
Kumar Mohapatra Memorial Committee. Any direct contact with the author is strictly
prohibited and could lead to a penalty in marks.

DR. Ashok Kumar Mohapatra Moot Court Proposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DR. Ashok Kumar Mohapatra Moot Court Proposition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DR. Ashok Kumar Mohapatra Moot Court Proposition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MOOT PROPOSITION

6. In 2024, an investigative journalist, Arun Deshmukh, managed to infiltrate these

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

5. Whether the provisions of Prevention of Animal cruelty Act , 1960 is sufficient

You might also like