Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Nagpur Division Bench comprising Justice Sunil Shukre and Justice MW Chandwani has directed the Nagpur Civic Authority to place before the court the register of sterilised dogs. 

The High Court has asked the civic body if the dogs collared by the civic authority were sterilised and if so, whether their ears have been clip pet or tattooed.

The civic body has also been directed to clarify whether or not tokens have been issued to those dogs while maintaining the register of such sterilised dogs. 

Advocate Atharva Manohar one of the intervenors submitted before the court that as per the direction of the civic authorities his organization apprehended four stray dogs and also sterilised three out of four stray dogs. He informed the court that the fourth dog could not be sterilised because the dog was too young and sick.

The bench agreed with the submission of Advocate Atharva that either the custody of the dog could be retained or it could be given to the respondents for adoption and they would ensure the welfare of the stray dogs. 

Advocate Mirza for the petitioner submitted before the court that the Commissioner of Police has only issued a Circular directing the Police Stations to take appropriate action in terms of the order of this Court initiating action under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, however, no such action could be initiated unless a publication of the same was made. 

The court said, 

"We are of the view that unless some information is received by the Commissioner of Police regarding nuisance created by dogs in a particular locality, the Commissioner of Police would not be in a position to exercise his statutory powers and this information, if it is credible and disclosing real nuisance, can possibly come amongst others, from the concerned Police Stations. Therefore, we find nothing wrong in issuing the Circular on the part of the Commissioner of Police."

The division bench also accepted the unconditional apology of the Deputy Commissioner & Director, Solid Waste Management Department, Municipal Corporation, Nagpur. The said apology was made after the court had issued a show cause notice to the commissioner requesting the Registrar to suggest one of the places situated in the premises of the High Court for being designated as a feeding spot for dogs inside the premises of the Hon’ble High Court.

The court while accepting the apology said that: 

"His affidavit of apology is not happily worded but, we are willing to grant leniency to the Deputy Commissioner - Dr. Gajendra Pandhari Mahalle with the hope that he has realised now the responsibility and duty of his office. The unconditional apology is accepted and the issue of proposed contempt action against him is closed."

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