Delhi High Court dismisses plea over alleged Animal Cruelty at Ambani Pre-Wedding Event, warns against frivolous petitions [Read Order]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed a contempt petition alleging inhumane treatment of animals during industrialist Mukesh Ambani’s son’s pre-wedding celebrations. The court emphasized the unreliability of newspaper reports as evidence and cautioned against filing frivolous petitions.

Justice Dharmesh Sharma rejected the plea filed by a lawyer, Rahul Narula, who claimed wilful disobedience of a division bench’s earlier order regarding the use of animals at the event, which was held from March 1-3, 2024.

The court noted, “On a meticulous perusal of the order dated 14.02.2024, this Court finds no cause of action or foundation to prima facie establish the commission of any inhumane or cruel treatment meted out to the animals by respondents No. 3 and 4.”

The initial petition before the division bench had challenged the constitutional validity of Section 23 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, based on a January 13 Economic Times report about animal use in the Ambani wedding. The division bench had directed a High Powered Committee (HPC) to oversee the event to ensure no inhumane behavior towards animals.

Referring to Supreme Court precedents, Justice Sharma observed, “Newspaper reports cannot afford a ground for taking cognizance in law, which reports are merely hearsay, and unreliable unless and until proved by certain legally admissible cogent material.” The court cited the cases of Samant and Bal Krishna v. George Fernandes (1969) and Laxmi Raj Sethi v. State of Tamil Nadu (1988) to support this stance.

The court criticized the news article cited by the petitioner, stating, “Evidently, on a prima-facie perusal of the report of Himal Southasian dated 20.03.2024, it appears to have all the trappings of sensationalism in journalism. The headline of the article, its narrative, and the layout chosen for the article—large and enhanced photos, flashy colors, and use of morphed images—seem to be an attempt to attract the attention of the audience.”

Justice Sharma expressed concern over allegations against the High Powered Committee (HPC), remarking, “The allegations leveled against the HPC for not carrying out its task, which has been constituted by the Tripura High Court and its remit extended by the Supreme Court of India, are utterly in bad taste, unsavory, and unpalatable.” The court noted that the HPC is chaired by a former Judge of the Supreme Court and includes other experts and senior officers.

The court also highlighted that the petitioner had not independently verified the allegations or filed any RTI applications to gather evidence, relying solely on the newspaper article.

While considering imposing costs, the court refrained, noting, “Although this is a fit case where the present petition should be dismissed with exemplary costs upon the petitioner, since he is a practicing advocate, he is impressed upon to desist from filing such frivolous petitions in the future.”

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the contempt petition, highlighting the need for legally admissible evidence rather than reliance on potentially sensationalized news reports.

[Read Order]