Abstract
This paper critically examines the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, and its proposed amendments banning the public consumption of beef, situating it within the broader framework of Hindu nationalism and cultural identity politics. While these regulations are presented as ways to protect the sanctity of cows, they also reflect deeper political goals associated with Hindu nationalism, which raises serious concerns about how they will affect India’s cultural pluralism. The paper explores whether these restrictions are constitutional safeguards or an outright misuse of state power intruding upon citizens’ private lives. Do these laws uphold harmony or sear the essence of diversity? The answer might help in whether India’s democracy remains a feast of pluralism or succumbs to pressures of majoritarianism.
Introduction
The humble cow finds its spotlight again- this time in Assam. In 2015, as the Maharashtra government decided to outlaw the sale, possession and consumption of beef it became apparent as to how it became the noble mission to safeguard the sensibilities of Hindus, who consider the cow a holy creature.[1] While the legislations on banning cow slaughter is not new in India or for that matter in Assam, the recent legislative changes, an expansion of earlier rule that restricted the sale of beef near certain religious places like temples, now proscribes the consumption of beef in public places.[2] This brings to light some deeper, meatier issues from the time these bans were first introduced.
The Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021,[3] banned cattle slaughter and the sale and purchase of beef and beef products in areas “predominantly inhabited by Hindu, Jain, Sikh and other non-beef eating communities” or within 5 km of a temple or a Hindu religious institution-a satra (monastery). The recent amendments take a step further to introduce the ban on consumption of beef in all public places including restaurants, hotels, public functions and community spaces.[4] This has raised ardent debates that extends far beyond the dinner plate and at the core lies the fundamental question of – is the real beef with pluralism itself? It is not a dietary choice that was questioned but it was the fabric of India’s pluralism itself that was contested which respects diversity both in theory and in practice.
This paper takes a keen look at the ideological roots behind such laws, tracing back to the long-standing connection of Hindu nationalism and its enduring focus on cow protection. A scrutiny of the case of Assam and the laws of similar tenor elsewhere can reveal that cultural hegemony and majoritarianism are donned in legal clothing. With a touch of humour yet analytical lens, the paper tries to dissect the implications of these bans on the country’s pluralistic ethos, raising critical questions about the sustainability of these measures in a society celebrated for its diversity. Can cultural identity and constitutional rights coexist harmoniously on the same plate or are we in collision with our democratic ideals? It encourages for a constructive dialogue on navigating issues of complex character, asking whether India’s pluralism can survive the heat by striking a balance or if it is being slowly overcooked in the pressure cooker of cultural identity politics. The answer might just lie in opening up the kitchen of discussion before the whole nation’s palate turns bland.
The right to exercise one’s choice in relation to food habits and preferences stems from the constitution which protects the citizen’s fundamental rights including the Right to life and personal liberty.[5] The right to choose is crucial because it gives people the autonomy to control their choices and decide what is best for them.[6] As was noted and correctly so by Justice Chelameshwar in the nine-judge bench case of Justice Puttaswamy that “I do not think that anybody would like to be told by the State as to what they should eat or how they should dress or whom they should be associated with either in their personal, social or political life.”[7] This brings us to the question of whether the State can regulate a citizen’s dietary habit. Sure, it can regulate or ban cattle slaughter within its territorial capacities but can it dictate what goes on your plate? When it comes to choosing what to eat, it becomes a personal matter which flows from the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.[8] Thus, to maintain the constitutionality of such a policy which dictate and govern a citizen’s right to eat food of their choice would become challenging in the court.
[1]“Sacred Slaughter: An Analysis of Historical, Communal, and Constitutional Aspects of Beef Bans in India: Politics, Religion & Ideology: Vol 17 , No 4 – Get Access,” accessed January 22, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21567689.2016.1259108.
[2]“Assam’s Beef Ban: The Laws, and History of Cow Protection in India, Explained,” Hindustan Times, December 14, 2024, https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/assams-beef-ban-the-laws-and-history-of-cow-protection-in-india-explained-101734184577922.html.
[3]“Act No. 25 of 2021 Assam.Pdf,” accessed January 22, 2025, https://prsindia.org/files/bills_acts/acts_states/assam/2021/Act%20No.%2025%20of%202021%20Assam.pdf.
[4]The Hindu Bureau, “Assam Govt. Bans Public Consumption of Beef to Strengthen Cattle Preservation Act,” The Hindu, December 4, 2024, sec. Assam, https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/assam/assam-bans-public-consumption-of-beef/article68947674.ece.
[5]“Article 21 in Constitution of India,” accessed January 22, 2025, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1199182/.
[6]“Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) vs Union Of India on 26 September, 2018,” accessed January 8, 2025, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/127517806/.
[7]“Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) vs Union Of India on 26 September, 2018.”
[8]“Article 21 in Constitution of India.”