‘Residents Who Wish to Feed Stray Dogs Must Adopt Them’: Bombay HC Prohibits Public Feeding of Stray Dogs in Nagpur

Nagpur Bench of Bombay HIGH COURT LAW INSIDER

Bhuvana Marni

Published on: October 22, 2022 at 19:33 IST

On Thursday, Bombay High Court’s Nagpur Bench issued a slew of directions regarding the feeding of stray dogs and also directed civic officials and the police to take “strict action” against anyone obstructing them from acting against the menace of stray dogs.

If people are interested in feeding stray dogs, they must adopt them and only feed them inside their homes, says the court.

In 2006, an order was passed by the division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and Anil Pansare, where a PIL filed by activist Vijay Talewar through advocate Firdos Mirza seeking action against the dog menace.

“We direct in general that no citizen and no resident of Nagpur and areas surrounding it shall feed or make any attempt to feed the stray dogs in public places, gardens… If any person is interested in feeding stray dogs, he shall first adopt the stray dog/bitch, bring it home, register it with Municipal Authorities or put it in some dogs shelter home and then showering his love and affection on it, may feed it while taking its personal care in all respect.”

The court added that “real charity lies in taking the complete care and not just feeding and then leaving poor creatures to fend for themselves.”

The Commissioner, Nagpur Municipal Corporation to impose a penalty of not more than Rs. 200 on persons found feeding dogs in public places, directed by the Bench.

“We further direct the Commissioner, Nagpur Municipal Corporation to ensure that, no feeding of street dogs takes place at any place except at the own place of the dog feeder or in the dog shelter homes or any other authorized place and we also direct him to impose appropriate penalty for any breach of these directions, which penalty may not be more than of Rs.200/- for every breach as per the resolution already passed in this behalf by Nagpur Municipal Corporation”.

It court lamented the effects of animal lovers feeding goodies to the dog.

“These supposed friends of stray dogs do not realize the disastrous consequences of their charity. Fed on the goodies provided by the animal lover, many of the stray dogs become insolent and get even more violent in their behaviour towards human beings in general and children in particular.”

The bench further ordered the Commissioner, NMC to consider implementing out the directions given by the Full Bench of the HC in the case of the All India Animal Welfare Association regarding choosing a suitable land for a home for stray dogs, “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.”.

Although the Court stated that dogs are normally a man’s best friend, it is important to exercise caution when considering stray dogs because some of them might be ferocious and aggressive:

“This is not to imply that the belief that dogs are normally a man’s best friend is incorrect; rather, it must be viewed cautiously when it comes to dogs that are strays and are not kept as pets. Many of these stray animals exhibit aggressive behaviour, are ferociously wild, and are just out of control.”

“Therefore, it is necessary for the authorities to take control of the situation as mandated by law and for the Samaritans to step forward and offer their support to the authorities in reducing the risk posed by stray dogs.”

The bench also ordered public outreach efforts to inform the public of their respective duties and responsibilities under the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001.

“We further direct that strict action be taken against those responsible for creating hurdles and obstacles in the way of the authorities and their officers in carrying out their duties as required by this order and the applicable Rules, and in appropriate cases, appropriate offences also be registered against them.”

The issue was raised when the Supreme Court stated earlier this month that High Courts were no bar to hear petitions involving stray dogs that were pending before it.

Dhantoli Nagrik Mandal filed an intervention application.

The petitioner claimed that despite a 2006 decision from retired Justice JN Patel, stray dogs had become a problem in the Nagpur neighbourhoods of Dhantoli and Congress Nagar.

The Supreme Court Orders were frequently cited by activists as they attempted to relocate the dogs with the cooperation of a local corporator and NMC.

The court made the observation that following the instructions in the case involving the All India Animal Welfare Association would help to eliminate the problem of stray dogs without inflicting cruelty on the stray animals.

This includes a Monitoring Committee, a Dog Control Cell, and an online facility to receive complaints about the nuisance caused by stray dogs. A mobile number and Twitter account are also provided for social media complaints.

Related Post