Read Time: 10 minutes

Synopsis

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice Sunil Shukre and Justice Abhay Ahuja issued directions to the Municipal Corporation to take steps for the people who have been affected due to stray dogs in Nagpur.

The High Court before issuing directions to the Municipal Corporation noted that

“The stray dogs are seen to be freely roaming around the streets of Nagpur with no restrictions and prohibitions whatsoever and are seen to be running after moving vehicles and even pedestrians, while barking at them and scaring them all throughout. Some of the stray dogs have been seen to have made little children and babies as their targets of unwarranted aggression and attack, injuring them, mauling them and in some stray incidents even killing them.”

The High Court referred to All India Animal Welfare Association and ors Vs. Brihanmumbai M. Corporation reported in 2007(4) Bom.C.R.1 which was decided by the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court wherein directions were issued to the BMC to ensure strictly that there was no feeding of stray dogs in public places including beaches of Mumbai.

The division bench directed the citizen and residents to not feed them or make any attempt to feed the stray dogs in public places, gardens, etc. The court also directed the Municipal Commissioner to ensure that no feeding of stray dogs should take place except at the own place of the dog feeder or in the dog shelter homes, and if someone is found breaching the directions of the court then a penalty of not more than Rs. 200 can be imposed as per the resolution passed by the Municipal Corporation.

The Division Bench while taking a strong view against the people who feed dogs noted that

“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. They must understand that real charity lies in taking the complete care and not just feeding and then leaving poor creatures to fend for themselves. This is the most basic duty a benevolent must perform if he has real compassion for stray dogs. But the so called friends of stray dogs shy away from performing this basic duty of theirs and the result is of uncontrolled growth in population and nuisance of stray dogs.”

The High Court also granted permission for utilizing an amount of Rs. 17 crores to the municipal corporation to implement the program of birth control for stray dogs and noted that

“On receipt of the amount, we direct, the Corporation shall utilize the amount for taking measures of birth control of the stray dogs and these measures, as submitted on behalf of the Corporation, would be in the nature of removal of testes and removal of ovaries, in respect of the suitable dogs and bitches respectively, while ensuring that no cruelty is caused to the dogs and bitches subjected to surgical procedure and also ensuring that appropriate pre and post surgery care is provided to these dogs and bitches.”

The court while terming the dog as man’s best friend and everyone’s duty towards dog, directed the Municipal Corporation to implement the direction of the All India Animal Welfare Association

“The directions given by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of All India Animal Welfare Association (supra) regarding identification of suitable plots of land, where the captured stray dogs could be housed by creating a large dog shelter home which would be well equipped with sufficient manpower and all the facilities required for upkeep and maintenance of the dogs. After all, one cannot forget that basically dog is the best friend of man and therefore, we must take it as duty of each one of us to take proper care of the dogs/bitches, whether they are reared as our pets or allowed to grow up in the streets.”

The Court also directed the municipal corporation to conduct public awareness campaign sensitizing the citizens and residents of Nagpur and various authorities about their respective duties and responsibilities under the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001.

Further, the court also allowed the corporation to take stern action against the persons creating hurdles and obstacles in the way of the authorities and their officers in performing their duties, and in suitable cases, appropriate offenses also be registered against them.

Case Title: Vijay Shankarrao Talewar & Anr. vs State of Maharashtra & Ors.