Ariyalur jallikattu leaves over 80 injured as organisers defy administration
Jallikattu organisers in Ariyalur district of Tamil Nadu held the bull-taming event despite the local administration denying them the permission citing lack of safety arrangements. At the end, over 80 people, mostly bystanders, were injured as about 300 bulls were released into a village lane.
Jallikattu. (PTI file photo)
UPDATED: Jan 27, 2017 14:38 IST
More than 80 people have been injured during a jallikattu that was organised in Ariyalur district of Tamil Nadu on Thursday.
Most of the victims were spectators and bystanders, who were present at the Palinganatham village in Ariyalur at the time of the incdent.
The bull-taming sport was organised defying the orders of the local administration, which had denied permission to hold the event citing 'improper safety arrangements for spectators'.
advertisement
READ| Here are a few differences between Jallikattu and Kambala
ARIYALUR JALLIKATTU: THINGS TO KNOW
- Of the 80 injured people, seven are suffered serious injuries and are being trated at the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial government hospital in Tiruchi.
- Most of the seriously injured victims suffered multiple fractures as bulls ran through them.
- Some of the participants of jallikattu also got injured as they tried to tame the bulls.
- Other victims were standing on the narrow lane where the bull-taming sport was organised.
- The incident occurred as the organisers went on unleashing about 300 bulls one after another just announcing prize money on each of them. The raging bulls ran through the lane leaving several injured on the way.
- A large number of spectators had gathered in Ariyalur from Tiruchi, Thanjavur, Perambalur, Villupuram and other areas to witness the event at Palinganatham, where jallikattu was held after a gap of seven years.
- The Supreme Court had banned jallikattu on the grounds that the traditional sport amounted to cruelty against animals.
- Tamil Nadu assembly passed a law on January 23 allowing jallikattu to be held in the state pending the review of its own 2014-judgement by the Supreme Court.
--- ENDS ---