High stakes and bloodshed as rooster fights defy State ban across districts

The annual spectacle of rooster fights, locally known as 'Kodi Pandem', during the Sankranti festival in parts of Andhra Pradesh, particularly Krishna and Godavari districts, presents a complex challenge to India's legal framework and societal values. Despite explicit bans by the judiciary and state government, these events continue to thrive, drawing massive crowds and facilitating illegal betting worth crores of rupees. This defiance underscores deep-seated cultural practices, economic incentives, and significant governance hurdles.

The tradition of rooster fights in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana dates back centuries, often associated with harvest festivals like Sankranti. Historically, it was seen as a rural sport, a display of prowess and entertainment. However, over time, it transformed into a high-stakes gambling enterprise, involving elaborate arrangements, specially bred roosters, and razor-sharp blades tied to their legs, leading to brutal fights and often the death of the birds. The cultural aspect has largely been overshadowed by the lure of quick money, attracting large-scale illegal betting and often involving organized crime syndicates.

The legal battle against rooster fights has a significant history. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, is the primary legislation prohibiting such activities. Sections 3 and 11 of this Act explicitly define cruelty to animals and prescribe penalties for causing unnecessary pain or suffering. Animal welfare organizations, notably the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) India, have consistently campaigned against these practices. The Supreme Court of India, in its landmark judgment concerning Jallikattu in 2014 (Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja and Ors.), explicitly included rooster fights as a cruel sport, upholding the Madras High Court's decision. Subsequently, the Andhra Pradesh High Court and the Supreme Court have reiterated the ban multiple times, directing the state government to ensure strict enforcement. Despite these clear directives, the recent Sankranti events in Krishna and Godavari districts saw makeshift arenas flourishing, indicating a persistent challenge to the rule of law.

Several key stakeholders are involved in this ongoing conflict. The **State Government and Law Enforcement Agencies** are tasked with enforcing the ban, but often face political pressure, logistical challenges, and sometimes, alleged complicity. **Animal Welfare Organizations** act as vigilant watchdogs, filing petitions and raising public awareness. **Local Organizers and Punters** are the primary perpetuators, driven by cultural sentiment, social status, and significant financial gains from betting. The involvement of influential local figures often complicates enforcement efforts.

This issue holds significant implications for India. Firstly, it highlights a critical **governance challenge** – the state's inability to effectively enforce judicial orders and existing laws. This erodes public trust in institutions and the rule of law. Secondly, it is a major **animal welfare concern**, violating the spirit of compassion for living creatures enshrined in Article 51A(g) of the Constitution, which mandates citizens to 'have compassion for living creatures'. The Directive Principles of State Policy, particularly Article 48A, also emphasize the state's duty to 'protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life'. Furthermore, the large-scale illegal betting fuels an **underground economy**, potentially linked to organized crime, money laundering, and other illicit activities, posing a threat to internal security. Socially, it represents a conflict between traditional practices and modern ethical standards, prompting a debate on how cultural heritage should evolve in a progressive society.

Looking ahead, the future implications are multi-faceted. There is a clear need for stronger, more consistent enforcement mechanisms, including better intelligence gathering and proactive police action. Public awareness campaigns are crucial to shift societal attitudes away from cruel sports and emphasize humane treatment of animals. The judiciary will likely continue to play a vital role in reinforcing the ban and scrutinizing enforcement efforts. Addressing the economic incentives, perhaps through alternative livelihood options or by promoting other forms of cultural celebration, could also be part of a long-term solution. Ultimately, the persistence of rooster fights during Sankranti serves as a stark reminder of the complex interplay between tradition, law, economy, and ethics in contemporary India.