Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

A division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice GS Kulkarni And Justice RN Laddha has recently asked the residential society of Mumbai to address complaints of security guards scaring away animals with sticks. The high court has also asked members of the housing society to make provisions for animals to drink water during the summer season.

“We direct the Society to entertain complaints from the petitioner and other members of the society in this regard, so that appropriate action can be taken against such Security Guards who are indulging in such actions. This would be necessary as we are of the clear opinion that such coercive methods would certainly amount to an act of cruelty to the animals,” the bench noted.

The high court while directing the society members to make provision for water for animals said that:

“It would be an obligation of the residents of the society to always make provision for adequate water to be made available to the animals more particularly considering the onset of the summer season,” the order recorded.

The court was hearing a plea filed by one Paromita Puthran, who lives in RNA Royale Park CHSL, regarding a dispute over designate areas in the housing society for feeding stray dogs. Puthran had requested that specific areas in the housing society be designated for this purpose, as she claimed that the society was unwilling to do so and was also preventing her from feeding the dogs.

Following the high court's instructions, Abodh Aras, the Chief Executive Officer of "The Welfare of Stray Dogs" organization, visited the society and created a report on suitable areas for feeding stray dogs. After reviewing the report, both Puthran and the housing society agreed to reconsider the plea for designated areas and come to a mutually agreeable solution.

Puthran also alleged that the society had employed bouncers to prevent dogs from entering the society's compound. However, the society argued that these individuals were merely security guards.

The bench then dismissed the petition while allowing the petitioner to pursue legal action if there was any illegality committed by the security personnel in question.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner informed the court that the petitioner would not bring within the premises of the society any new stray dogs and the same was accepted by the court.

Case Title: Paromita Puthran vs MCGM