More Coverage
Twitter Coverage
JOIN SATYAAGRAH SOCIAL MEDIA
"My Shelter Days are over, done, Because you, my master, took me home": Bombay HC imposes fine on citizens feeding strays in public places, "If these so-called friends are really interested in protection and welfare of strays, they must adopt those dogs"
In order to tackle the menace caused by stray dogs, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court recently ordered authorities to impose a fine of not more than ₹200 on citizens who feed them on roads and in public places [Vijay Shankarrao Talewar vs State of Maharashtra].
|
A division bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and Anil Pansare noted that despite measures by the authorities, the menace of stray dogs has increased in Nagpur city because of the irresponsible behavior of some citizens, who feed such dogs on the streets.
It suggested such citizens should adopt the dogs and take them to their homes and feed them.
"These citizens posing themselves as sympathizers and friends of stray dogs offer food packets and different titbits to stray dogs unmindful of the great harm that they are doing to society. 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 behavior towards human beings in general and children in particular," the bench observed.
The bench said that if these so-called friends of stray dogs are really interested in the protection and welfare of the strays, they must adopt the stray dogs, take them home 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 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 Court said.
The bench, therefore, directed that in general no citizen or resident of Nagpur and areas surrounding it shall feed the stray dogs in public places, gardens, etc.
"We further direct that if any person is interested in feeding stray dogs, he shall first adopt the stray dog/bitch, bring it to home, register it with Municipal Authorities or put it in some dog shelter home and then shower his love and affection on it, may feed it while taking its personal care in all respect. The Nagpur Municipal Corporation to impose an appropriate penalty for any breach of these directions, which penalty may not be more than Rs.200/- for every breach," the bench ordered.
The Court further noted that Section 44 of the Maharashtra Police Act allows the destruction of stray dogs.
It ordered that authorities must consider implementing it though not to the extent of destroying them but detaining them.
"The action that may be taken under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Police Act, we add, may not be of the extreme nature of the destruction of the stray dog but, it can be at least in the nature of detention of the stray dog as per the procedure prescribed and then handing over the stray dog to the Monitoring Committee set up for their appropriate placement/ disposal," the bench ordered.
Taking the overall view of the issue, the judges said, there is a need for the authorities to take charge of the matter, as required under the law, and also the need for samaritans to come forward and render their assistance to the authorities in controlling the stray dog hazard.
"This is not to say that there is something wrong with the view that a dog generally is the best friend of man but, this has to be taken with circumspection when it comes to dogs that are strays and are not kept as pets. Many of these strays are aggressive, ferociously wild, and simply uncontrollable in their behavior," the bench observed.
Advocate FT Mirza appeared for the Petitioners.
Additional Government Pleader DP Thakre represented the State.
Advocate SM Puranik represented the Nagpur Municipal Corporation.
Advocates Ashwin Deshpande and Aradhya Pande appeared as the Intervenor.
References:
Support Us
Satyagraha was born from the heart of our land, with an undying aim to unveil the true essence of Bharat. It seeks to illuminate the hidden tales of our valiant freedom fighters and the rich chronicles that haven't yet sung their complete melody in the mainstream.
While platforms like NDTV and 'The Wire' effortlessly garner funds under the banner of safeguarding democracy, we at Satyagraha walk a different path. Our strength and resonance come from you. In this journey to weave a stronger Bharat, every little contribution amplifies our voice. Let's come together, contribute as you can, and champion the true spirit of our nation.
ICICI Bank of Satyaagrah | Razorpay Bank of Satyaagrah | PayPal Bank of Satyaagrah - For International Payments |
If all above doesn't work, then try the LINK below:
Please share the article on other platforms
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text. The website also frequently uses non-commercial images for representational purposes only in line with the article. We are not responsible for the authenticity of such images. If some images have a copyright issue, we request the person/entity to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue.
Related Articles
- "No man is ever as anti-feminist as a really feminine woman": A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli noted that income tax returns do not necessarily furnish an accurate guide of the real income of parties in matrimonial disputes: Supreme Court
- "A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on": Google moves Supreme Court against National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order upholding CCI's ₹1,337 crore penalty for abuse of dominant position within the Android ecosystem
- Supreme Court stays Allahabad HC order to take over land from Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust: State Govt of UP allotted 400 acres to the Trust that violated the conditions and built a Mosque instead of a university
- Madhya Pradesh HC accepted petition for stay on Muslims performing Namaz in the compound of Bhojshala monument: Read how an educational centre and a historic temple of Goddess Saraswati became Kamal Maulana mosque
- "Man is not what he thinks he is, he is what he hides": Supreme Court rejects plea seeking details of December 12, 2018, Collegium meeting held, "Whatever is discussed shall not be in the public domain. Only final decision required to be uploaded"
- "The cost of false justice: a childhood lost": In an unsettling twist of justice, even minors aren't spared from the misuse of SC-ST Act, “I request CM & DCM to explain the meaning of POCSO, Atrocity, & assault cases filed against us”, asks an 8-yr-old
- “Keep your pity because you’re going to need all your pity for what’s coming”: Central Government declared PFI a terror outfit of radical Islam, its associates or fronts as an unlawful association and ban them with immediate effect, for a period of 5 year
- "गुस्ताख़ी-ए-फ़रिश्ता": Delhi High Court dismisses Waqf Board's plea against Sunehri Bagh Mosque's demolition, led by chairman of the Delhi Waqf Board, Amanatullah Khan; NDMC seeks public insights, inviting suggestions and objections
- “We know what we are, but know not what we may be”: Every human being has right to choose his or her gender identity: Rajasthan High Court ordered authorities to consider changing the records of a man who secured a job under the General Female Category
- Gender Biased Indian Law: Delhi High Court observed that in India, expenditure borne by brother in supporting his divorced sister must be taken into account while passing an order of maintenance in favour of his wife