The Gauhati High Court’s Kohima Bench delivered a split verdict on April 22, 2026, in appeals arising from a single-judge order that had quashed Nagaland’s July 4, 2020 notification banning the commercial import, trade and sale of dog meat. Because the two-judge Division Bench of Justices Budi Habung and Robin Phukan differed on key legal points, the case does not attain finality and the matter has been directed to the Chief Justice for administrative orders, the court record shows. Justice Robin Phukan wrote in a separate opinion: “In view of the divergence of opinion, the Registry is directed to apprise the matter to Hon’ble Chief Justice and to seek appropriate order on the administrative side.”
The appeals were brought by animal welfare organisations including People For Animals, Humane Society International/India and Akhil Bharat Krushi Go Seva Sangh after a June 2, 2023 single-judge judgment set aside the state notification. The 2020 notification had prohibited commercial dog markets, the import and trading of dogs for commercial purposes, and the sale of dog meat in markets and dine-in restaurants. Original petitioners in the earlier challenge were traders who said the ban affected their livelihoods and that they operated under licences issued by the Kohima Municipal Council.
Justice Budi Habung, who agreed with the single-judge decision and dismissed the appeals, reasoned that Regulation 2.5.1 of the Food Safety and Standards (FSS) Regulations, 2011 prescribes standards for specified animals but does not expressly forbid the consumption of animals not listed. He said the omission of dogs from the regulation cannot automatically be read as a statutory ban, described a 2014 FSSAI circular as lacking statutory force to create a substantive prohibition, and held that the power to prohibit food articles lies with the Commissioner of Food Safety rather than the Chief Secretary. He also noted an absence of scientific evidence that dog meat is inherently unsafe.
In dissent, Justice Robin Phukan argued the state notification should stand. He held that because dogs are not listed as “animals” under Regulation 2.5.1(a), they are excluded from lawful slaughter, invoking the legal principle expressio unius est exclusio alterius (the express mention of some things excludes others). He further found that the Food Safety and Standards Act can override local permissions, that Article 256 of the Constitution obliges states to enforce parliamentary laws-supporting the executive notification-and that the right to trade is subject to public-health restrictions. Justice Phukan also observed that traders did not base their case on custom, so protections under Article 371A were not engaged.
With the bench divided, the Registry will notify the Chief Justice and the matter may be placed before a third judge. Until then, the status quo remains, leaving both traders and animal-welfare groups to await the court’s next procedural direction.
Original Source: https://www.morungexpress.com/nagaland-dog-meat-ban-issue-case-heads-to-chief-justice-after-split-decision
Category: Nagaland
Tags:
Publish Date: 2026-04-29 23:20:00
