Introduction:
In real life, rights and liabilities are not limited to humans. They do not enjoy exclusivity when it comes to enjoying rights and duties. There are several entities such as governments and corporations—they are non-living beings but still enjoy several rights and duties. These entities are recognized as the legal subjects.
The concept of legal personality enables the smooth functioning of complex social and economic relationships. Whether a government enacts regulation or a corporation enters into contracts, the basis of the legality lies in the concept of legal personality.
In this article, you will develop a deep understanding regarding the types of persons, the legal personality of various living and non-living beings, along with landmark cases of each of them.
Types of Persons in Jurisprudence:
There are two types of persons as per the subject of jurisprudence:
-
Natural Person:
A natural person is one who is a person in fact, but there are some natural persons who do not enjoy rights and duties.
There are two conditions in which a natural person can enjoy rights and duties:
- Must be a living being
- Must be recognized by law
-
Artificial or Legal Person:
A legal or artificial person has a legal name, right, protection, privilege, responsibility, and liability under law.
Two requirements to be a legal person:
- Corpus: which means body
- Animus: which means the intention of the sovereign or the government for considering that body as a person
Definition of Legal Personality:
Different jurists gave their definitions of legal personality at different points of time. Some of them are mentioned below:
- Salmond: “Defines a person as any being to whom the law regards as capable of rights and duties”
- Gray: “Defines a person as entity to which rights and duties may be attributed”
- Savigny: “Person is the subject or bearer of rights”
- PW Paton: “Legal personality is a medium through which some such units are created in whom rights can be vested”
- John Austin: “It includes physical or natural person including every being which can be deemed as human being”
Legal Personality of Animals:
In the words of Mahatma Gandhi: “Greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
Animals were not granted legal status as there can be difficulty in admissibility of evidence, as may be contended by the opposite party. But there is an interesting example: Sutherland, in his Principle of Criminology, has referred to an interesting trial of rats in 1519, where the court rejected the defense and awarded a sentence of punishment.
Even in ancient Indian texts like Manusmriti, we see instances where animals were punished if they inflicted any harm to humans. Even in ancient Greek law, animals and trees were tried in courts of law.
But in modern times, the master is vicariously liable for the act of an animal, as the animal is not aware of the repercussions of its acts, but the master is well aware and can very easily manage the problem.
Even though animals do not have legal personality, we still have laws protecting them as they also face different problems in their day-to-day life such as:
- Cosmetic treatment on animals
- Painful life of stray dogs after the birth control procedure
- Testing of products
- Sexual violence on them
So to protect them, we have the following laws:
Constitutional and Statutory Provisions
- Article 51A(g): It is a fundamental duty added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment. It states that it is the duty of every citizen to protect the natural environment including forests, wildlife, and to have compassion towards other living creatures.
- Article 48A: States the duty of the State in protecting and safeguarding forests and wildlife of the country.
- Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960: Introduced by the Union Minister of Food and Agriculture at that time, A.P. Jain. The main objective was to prevent unnecessary pain or suffering to animals and to amend laws relating to prevention of cruelty to animals.
- Wildlife Protection Act, 1972: The objective was to provide protection of animals and plants and to ensure ecological balance in the country.
- Section 428 IPC: Provides punishment of up to 2 years, fine, or both, if someone causes mischief to any animal worth ₹10 or more by maiming or poisoning.
- Section 429 IPC: Pertains to mischief caused to any animal by poisoning or maiming, where the animal is valued above ₹50. Punishable with up to 5 years of imprisonment, a fine, or both.
Landmark Case Laws
- People for Ethical Treatment of Animals vs Union of India:
The Bombay High Court held that any movie wishing to use animals must receive a No Objection Certificate from the Animal Welfare Board of India. - Ozair Hussain vs Union of India:
The Supreme Court held that packaging of food, medicines, and drugs should contain red and green dots to indicate the origin of the product. - Animal Welfare Board of India vs Nagaraja:
This case raised concerns regarding the Jallikattu festival celebrated in the South, where bulls are subjected to cruelty like being given alcohol to make them aggressive for entertainment purposes. The issue was raised on the grounds of animal cruelty. - Ajay Madhusudan Maratha vs New Sarvodya CHS Ltd:
The Delhi Consumer Forum held that a housing society cannot prohibit a resident from having pets. - Petingall vs Petingall:
In this case, the testator left a deed for the maintenance of horses and dogs for as long as they live. The court held that a trust for the benefit of animals can be made, and such a trust deed is valid and enforceable by law.
Recent Developments
- Ban on Animal Testing for Cosmetics in India:
In 2013, India completely banned the testing of cosmetic products on animals. In 2014, India also banned the import of cosmetics tested on animals. This made India the first South Asian country to impose a dual ban on domestic testing and foreign imports. - Legal Basis for Such Ban:
Achieved by amending Rule 135B of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. This also aligns with Article 51A(g).
Conclusion
Various laws for protection of animals have significantly shifted their status from being merely property of their masters to being capable of some rights for their protection. Further, courts also provide for limited legal status to animals after interpreting Article 51A(g).
Sources
- https://indiankanoon.org/
- https://www.casemine.com/
