The highways in India are referred to as the arteries of commerce and migration, as the vehicles & carriers travelling unceasingly interstate sustain livelihoods by supplying goods, services, and labourers to different parts of the country. Among these carriers are also the cargo cattle trucks that harbour innumerable animals stacked on top of each other, appearing as though freight and poultry are packed into crates, where death is inevitable before their destination.

This modus operandi, which is prohibited but widely accepted, is an integral part of the day-to-day operations of the interstate cattle business and remains relatively quiet because the legislation has chosen not to address it. It is contradictory, as intricate and elaborate laws on animal transportation in India, such as the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act) and the Transport of Animals Rules, 1978, exist. The regulation consists of a very intricate roll base, space overrun, water accessibility, feeding timetable, rest intervals, veterinary licensure, and the design of the vehicle. These guidelines on paper represent a moral realisation that animals are living creatures and their misery matters, regardless of whether it is in trade. However, on the highway, all these safeguards become a myth.

Inhumanity by choice, not by design

All the segments in the Indian livestock economy sustain through the inter-state transport. Besides these, the lack of cooperation between enforcement agencies is another issue that promotes such an abusive practice. The only example given is cattle, which are sometimes transported for 24-48 hours without any water whatsoever, to the point of overfeeding them illegally. Death cases of poultry during transportation are silently accepted as an expense of doing business. All these are happening within the livestock industry, and it is not isolated cases but the norm. Law enforcement agencies, on their part, do little to enforce the law, as in most cases, they view the issue of cattle transportation as a regulatory or revenue issue, rather than addressing it in the light of animal welfare. Check posts are active only when an activist or inspector arrives at locations where permits, taxes, and compliance with trade documents are the primary focus, and issues of animal welfare violations, such as overcrowding, injuries, and dehydration, are identified.

The Poverty of Penalties

The introduction of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act causes other frustrations. The penalty imposed is a mere fine imposed for mishandling animals, compared to the amount of distress an animal suffers during transportation, and these sanctions are not usually economically hampering to the business giants. Such a law that does not provide stringent punishments against animal abuse is bound to encourage immorality.

Additionally, the handling of cases under this Act is infrequent and of low priority because incidents of such cruelty during transit are seldom submitted to the superior courts. If they are submitted, it is considered a minor malpractice rather than an unforgivable infringement of the system. It is not accidental that such cases have a low rate of litigation; it is a sign of a legal culture that excludes animal suffering and discusses it on the fringes of justiciability.

Federalism without reproach

Interstate transport suggests that a governance deficit exists within India’s federal system. Animal welfare remains under the Concurrent List, although there is no unanimous enforcement by the authorities, including State police, transport authorities, veterinary departments, and local governments. Therefore, there is no clear department that is assigned responsibility. The misunderstanding concerning who has jurisdiction gives a pretext for the maltreatment to be practised. The exporting States’ livestock will vehemently claim that once they cross the border, they are no longer responsible for the animals; the importing States believe that they are left with the issue of suffering. The animal is therefore losing in this regulatory rat race at every level.

Beyond Paper Compliance: Reimagining Enforcement

Shear cruelty during the transportation of animals is a topic that cannot be resolved by just passing an amendment to the current laws. There must be a total reversal of the law regarding animals as property to one that recognises animals as having rights, which the law should observe.

The initial measure must involve revising the punishments stipulated by the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and replacing them with another value that corresponds to the severity and magnitude of the harm. In addition to the standard sentence of imposing fines, sanctions such as seizing vehicles used for smuggling animals, suspending a driver’s license, and placing a list of offending companies involved in animal transportation cruelty should be implemented and enforced.

Secondly, enforcement needs to be an integral part of the system, rather than a random occurrence. Welfare standards, which one would theoretically consider good, can be implemented by deploying inspectors for animal welfare along state borders to monitor transportation, introducing mandatory veterinary inspections for long-distance transportation, and authorising digital-based tracking of goods delivered.

Further, the judicial system should remove the barrier of reluctance to engage in it. The steps that might be taken, which include public interest litigation (PIL), self-cognisance of High Courts, and the purposive interpretation of Article 51A(g) of the Constitution, can be utilised to the utmost benefit of the anti-cruelty movement. The Indian courts have long held that offering protection to living things is one of the constitutional responsibilities; therefore, animal cruelty during transport can be restructured as a constitutional failure rather than a statutory one.

The Economic Ethic of a Gripping Nation.

Transnationalism reveals a governance vacuum that is inherent in India’s federal system. The States that export livestock tend to say that they are not involved with animals having crossed the border; conversely, the States to which they are sold believe that they have received the burden of suffering. Therefore, the animal loses at every stage in this regulatory relay. Although the field of animal welfare appears to be included in the concurrent list, accountability essentially lies with the state police, transportation authorities, and veterinary services. The misinterpretation of the jurisdiction allows maltreatment to occur. Thus, by making every department responsible for animal welfare, we can move closer to a better future.