Expanding the Circle of Justice: A Constitutional Perspective on Animal Rights in India
Introduction
The idea of justice, once confined to human interactions, is now steadily widening its horizon to include the non-human world. In India, this philosophical shift has found resonance within constitutional and judicial thought, giving rise to what can be called “the expanding circle of justice.” As societies evolve, so do their moral and legal understandings of what it means to live ethically. The recognition of animal rights under India’s constitutional framework reflects this evolution—a movement from human-centered justice to a more inclusive, compassionate, and eccentric vision of law. —an approach that increasingly intersects with modern principles of corporate governance compliance, where businesses are expected to uphold ethical and socially responsible standards extending beyond human stakeholders.
A Civilizational Ethos of Compassion
Long before modern constitutionalism took root, India’s cultural and religious traditions regarded animals as integral to the moral universe. Ancient texts like the Mahabharata and Upanishads speak of the unity of all living beings. The principle of ahimsa (non-violence) formed the ethical backbone of Indian thought, emphasizing coexistence rather than domination.
This civilizational ethos found its way into the modern Indian Constitution. Though drafted in a time when the concept of animal rights was still nascent globally, the framers ensured that compassion towards all living creatures was embedded within the national moral code. The result is a Constitution that, while human-centered in its immediate application, carries within it the seeds of a more inclusive jurisprudence—one that acknowledges the moral and ecological significance of non-human life.
The Constitutional Landscape
Animal protection in India draws strength from a web of constitutional provisions that together form a coherent moral and legal mandate.
-Article 48 directs the State to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines, and to prohibit the slaughter of certain categories of cattle.
-Article 48A, added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, places a duty on the State to “protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the ”
-Article 51A(g) makes it a fundamental duty of every citizen “to have compassion for living creatures,” marking a rare instance where the Constitution explicitly appeals to the moral conscience of citizens.
-Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, has been expansively interpreted by courts to include the right to a healthy environment—and, by extension, the welfare of animals.
These provisions collectively represent an evolving constitutional morality that seeks to align governance and citizenship with ecological and ethical responsibility.
Judicial Awakening: From Welfare to Rights
The real expansion of the constitutional circle of justice has occurred through the judiciary’s creative interpretation. Over the past few decades, Indian courts have steadily recognized animals as entities possessing intrinsic worth, not merely as property or resources for human use.
1. Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja (2014)
This landmark judgment on the Jallikattu and bullock-cart races transformed animal welfare into a constitutional imperative. The Supreme Court held that animals have the right to live with “honour and dignity”, and that unnecessary pain and suffering violate their inherent worth.
Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan articulated the concept of “species best interest,” aligning animal rights with the constitutional values of compassion under Articles 48A and 51A(g).
The Court’s reasoning was revolutionary—it did not merely prohibit cruelty; it affirmed a positive duty to ensure well-being. The verdict marked a philosophical shift from welfare (minimizing suffering) to rights (recognizing intrinsic value).
2. People for Elimination of Stray Troubles (PEST) v. Animal Welfare Board of India (2016)
In this case, the Court intervened to protect stray dogs from arbitrary culling. It reiterated that compassion for living creatures is a fundamental duty, and that human inconvenience cannot justify cruelty. The judgment reinforced the idea that animals have a right to exist in their natural environment, free from human-inflicted harm.
3. Karnail Singh v. State of Haryana (2019)
Perhaps the boldest step came when the Punjab and Haryana High Court declared the entire animal kingdom as a legal entity with rights akin to those of human beings. Justice Rajiv Sharma observed that animals have corresponding duties and liabilities through human guardians, placing citizens in the position of protectors (in loco parentis). This recognition of legal personhood expanded the very notion of justice, symbolically breaking the boundary between human and non-human rights.
The Statutory Framework: Strengths and Shortcomings
While constitutional values provide the moral foundation, the statutory regime gives them practical form. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act) remains the principal legislation for protecting animals. It prohibits acts of cruelty and establishes the Animal Welfare Board of India to oversee enforcement. However, the law has long been criticized for its mild penalties and outdated definitions of cruelty.
The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 further strengthens protection for wild animals, recognizing ecological interdependence as a foundation for conservation. Yet, gaps remain—especially in addressing cruelty towards domesticated and farm animals, and in ensuring that the enforcement mechanisms align with constitutional compassion.
The proposed Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Amendment) Bill, 2022, which seeks to increase penalties and categorize certain offenses as cognizable, reflects an effort to modernize animal welfare laws. Its enactment would bring India closer to realizing the spirit of Articles 48A and 51A(g).
The Shift Towards Ecocentric Jurisprudence
Indian courts have increasingly embraced what scholars term an ecocentric approach—a legal philosophy that places nature and all living beings at the center of justice, rather than viewing them merely through human utility. This approach emerged prominently in environmental cases like T.N. Goda Varman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997), where the Supreme Court recognized forests and wildlife as entities deserving protection for their own sake.
By integrating this philosophy into animal welfare cases, Indian jurisprudence is constructing a continuum of rights that extends from environmental protection to animal dignity. The recognition that “the right to life” is not an exclusively human prerogative represents one of the most profound moral and constitutional evolutions of our time.
Challenges Ahead
Despite this moral and judicial progress, practical implementation remains fraught with challenges. Cruelty in transportation, entertainment, and slaughter continues unabated in many regions. Weak enforcement, lack of awareness, and the commodification’s of animals in industrial farming undermine the constitutional vision of compassion.
Moreover, balancing human interests- such as livelihood and public safety- with animal welfare often leads to conflict. The path forward lies not in antagonism but in harmonization: developing policies that promote coexistence, sustainable development, and humane treatment.
Strengthening local animal welfare boards, integrating animal ethics into education, and sensitizing law enforcement agencies are essential steps in that direction.
Conclusion
The Indian Constitution, though drafted in a human-centered world, carries within it a moral compass pointing toward universal compassion. Through judicial innovation and evolving social consciousness, India has begun to expand the circle of justice to embrace animals as sentient beings with intrinsic worth.
This evolution is not merely legal—it is philosophical, ethical, and deeply civilizational. To protect animals is not only to uphold constitutional duties but also to reaffirm the timeless Indian idea of harmony between all forms of life. The challenge now is to translate these lofty ideals into living realities, where every act of governance, every policy, and every citizen’s conduct reflects the compassion that our Constitution envisions.
In today’s legal and commercial landscape, this constitutional philosophy increasingly aligns with modern principles of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), where businesses are expected to operate ethically, sustainably, and with compassion for all living beings. The challenge now is to translate these lofty ideals into living realities, where every act of governance, every policy, and every citizen’s conduct reflects the compassion that our Constitution envisions.
In the expanding circle of justice, the inclusion of animals is not just an act of mercy—it is the next milestone in humanity’s journey toward a truly just and compassionate civilization.
