Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

A Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur comprising Justice Sunil B Shukre and M.W. Chandwani has directed the Nagpur Civic Body to check if stray dogs have been unauthorizedly collared and to take steps to remove the collars along with taking action against the erring persons according to the law.

The court was hearing an intervention application filed by an NGO in the Public Interest Litigation which was filed against the menace of stray dogs in Nagpur. The NGO, Save Speechless Organisation, was providing dog shelter homes for taking proper care of stray dogs.

Advocate for the petitioners, F.T Mirza, submitted to the court that the NGO should be directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs to prove their bonafide. However, the Court found that the NGO had already proved its bona fides by already running a dog shelter wherein it is taking care of about 150 to 200 stray dogs and for the same reason the court did not direct the NGO to deposit money with the court.

Advocate Mirza submitted that the Apex Court had only stayed one of the observations and the whole of the earlier order has not been stayed. Therefore, the civic body and the police should follow the rest of the directions of the court. She informed the court that the only observation which was stayed by the Apex Court was,

“If these so called friends of stray dogs are really interested in protection and welfare of the stray dogs, they must adopt the stray dogs, take home the stray dogs or at least put them up in some good dog shelter homes and bear all the expenses for their registration with Municipal Authorities and towards their maintenance, health and vaccination.”

The court directed the Commissioner of Police and the Civic Body to file the compliance report and take steps to curb the menace keeping in mind the direction issued by the Apex Court.

Advocate SS Sanyal, one of the intervenors, submitted a document that contained research papers and the revised module for stray dog management, rabies eradication, and reducing man-dog conflict, devised by the Animal Welfare Board of India. He informed the court that the revised module draws on the experiences of several other countries, including European countries, and our own country, which was successful in reducing the dog population. He submitted that if the module is adopted and followed by the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, it would help in reducing or removing the man-dog conflict, putting an end to the nuisance of stray dogs. 

The High Court then directed Nagpur Municipal Corporation to consider the guidelines prescribed in the revised module issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India for the purpose of eliminating stray dogs’ nuisance and taking care of the welfare of these stray dogs. The court also said that the civic body may consult the Animal Welfare Board of India if it thinks fit.

Advocate Mirza for the petitioners and Advocate Ashwin Despande for one of the intervenors (Respondent) pointed out that some of the persons have embarked upon the exercise of unauthorizedly collaring the stray dogs without obtaining their registration, just to create confusion in the mind of the officials of the Corporation, who are tasked with taking of action for controlling the nuisance of stray dogs.

Therefore the High Court directed Municipal Corporation to check whether any stray dogs were unauthorizedly collared and if so, to take steps for removing their collars forthwith and later on deal with them in accordance with the law. The Court also directed the authority to file the compliance report.