Over the past year, the Haryana Police has repeatedly invoked the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 to prosecute Muslim men for transporting buffaloes or possessing camel meat—despite there being no legal ban on the slaughter or consumption of these animals.
In several cases, police action has bypassed the state’s Gau Sanrakshan and Gau Samvardhan Act (HGSG), 2015—meant specifically to prohibit cow and oxen slaughter—and has instead relied on the more generic animal cruelty law.
A close analysis of 18 FIRs filed across the districts of Faridabad and Nuh reveals a pattern: the police frequently resort to Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA), which is designed to address neglect or cruelty to animals, not lawful slaughter.
In Faridabad, police records show 17 cases filed under Section 11 of the PCA Act—compared to ten under the HGSG Act. These 17 cases have implicated 22 individuals, of whom 17 have been arrested. In total, 1,651 kg of buffalo meat has been recovered. Meanwhile, under the HGSG Act—which carries a prison term of three to ten years—37 people have been booked, 23 arrested, and seizures include 31 cows, three oxen, and 305 kg of meat.
The trend extends to Nuh district as well. Police here have registered 147 cases under the HGSG Act, naming 476 accused and arresting 246. The seizures include 1,012 animals and 2,040 kg of beef. In parallel, 13 FIRs were registered under the PCA Act, with 37 accused and 26 arrested. These cases involved the seizure of 2,720 kg of camel meat and 400 kg of buffalo meat.
A Faridabad police officer explained, “We receive inputs about cow slaughter. When we raid, if cows are found, we use the HGSG Act. If buffaloes are found, we use the PCA Act.” However, neither buffalo nor camel slaughter is banned under Haryana law.
Despite this, FIRs show that cases are not being filed for the lack of a license to slaughter or sell meat, but for alleged “cruelty” during transport or slaughter—such as animals being “tied cruelly” or slaughtered “negligently.” The absence of licenses is rarely cited as the basis for these cases.
In one FIR from Dhauj police station, a police officer claimed to have witnessed a man slaughtering a buffalo inside a walled compound. The accused, Zahid, allegedly admitted to the act. Eighty kilograms of buffalo meat was seized. The FIR invoked Section 325 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS)—which punishes “mischief by killing or maiming an animal”—along with Section 11 of the PCA Act.
Yet Section 11 of the PCA clearly states that its provisions do not apply to the killing of animals for food, unless done with unnecessary pain or suffering. It includes prohibitions on strychnine injections, tethering animals in dangerous ways, or inflicting injury—but not the act of slaughter for consumption itself.
A police officer admitted, “Conviction under the PCA Act usually leads to a small fine. The offence is also bailable.”
In another FIR dated July 19 from Ferozepur Jhirka, police charged Ballu, son of Asgar, under the same PCA and BNS sections. The complaint narrates that Ballu was transporting a dead buffalo. A vet was summoned, and a post-mortem conducted. The report noted the animal died from hypovolemic shock due to a severed jugular vein, implying slaughter. Police concluded the animal had been “brutally” killed to sell meat, and booked Ballu accordingly.
Vakil, whose brother was arrested in a PCA case in Dhauj, runs a hotel nearby. “My brother didn’t have a license to slaughter the animal, but the FIR was filed anyway. He got bail at the police station itself, but we had to hire a lawyer, shut the hotel for a month, and face harassment. Every time we transport meat, there’s fear,” he said.
Another FIR filed on August 12 in Dhauj against a man named Nadeem outlines a police operation following a tip-off that he was transporting buffalo meat in a red WagonR. When intercepted, the car was reportedly filled with meat. Nadeem allegedly told police he was taking it to Fatehpur Taga to sell. Around 85 kg of buffalo meat was seized along with the vehicle, and Nadeem was charged under Section 325 of the BNS and Section 11 of the PCA.
These cases, though legally tenuous under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, have had real social and economic consequences for the accused—most of them Muslim. They face arrest, legal expenses, disruption to livelihoods, and growing fear around meat transport—despite operating in legal grey zones where the law has not expressly criminalized their actions.
