Agartala: Tripura royal scion and former state Congress president Pradyot Kishore Manikya DebBarman on Saturday said that the High Court of Tripura has overruled the provision of the merger agreement that was signed between Maharani Kanchan Prabha Devi and the governor-general of India on October 15, 1949.
Speaking with reporters, DebBarman said that the court “cannot” overrule the merger agreement where it clearly said that it has to be done in the House of Parliament as per the provision and agreement signed between the then ‘Maharani’ ahead of the merger.
According to the merger agreement, the state government was to continue the sponsorship of 14 temples, including animal sacrifice in all the temples where it had been practised in the past by the princely state.
He also said, “I am personally against animal cruelty and this won’t make gods happy. But the court could have consulted with the stakeholders and civil societies.”
“The court should not intervene between the man and his belief. If the court has banned animal sacrifice in temples, then the court should also ban animal sacrifice during the festival of Eid,” Pradyot said.
Advocate General Arun Kanti Bhowmik said the state government will think over the issue relating to making an appeal in the Supreme Court after going through the order of the High Court.
Earlier, the High Court on Friday, in a historic judgment, pronounced the ban over the animal sacrifice across the temples in the state.
The divisional bench of the HC comprising Chief Justice Sanjoy Karol and Justice Arindam Lodh was hearing the PIL filed by a retired judge of Tripura District and Sessions Court Subhash Bhattacharjee.
The court, in its order, said, “No person shall sacrifice such animals within the precincts of any of the temples within the state of Tripura.”
The government of Tripura has proposed development of Devi Tripureswari temple as a favourite international tourist destination. People of all beliefs and faiths are likely to visit in large numbers.
“Anyone of the devotees desirous of offering any animal out of personal faith, belief or desire, may do so, but, shall take back the animal and under no circumstance, any activity of animal sacrifice shall be permitted to be carried out,” the order read.
The court also suggested that the government can earmark land for opening shelter home for rearing such livestock.