The Bombay High Court's Nagpur bench on 20 Oct' 2022 issued a slew of directions regarding feeding of stray dogs and also directed civic officials and the police to take "stern action" against anyone obstructing them acting against the menace of stray dogs.

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

THE PROBLEM:

The blame of stray-dog-nuisance is put on stray-animal-feeders while masking the incapability of the municipal authority in effectively implementing a Animal Birth Control program

EXCERPTS from the COURT ORDER:

Few of the statements made in the court order deemed towards people interested in feeding strays:

1. “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”
2. “first formally adopt them and only feed them inside their homes”
3. “true charity lies in complete care, not just feeding and then leaving poor creatures to fend for themselves”
4. “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”

Statements mentioning about Section 44 of Maharashtra Police Act:

1. “provisions made in Section 44 of the Maharashtra Police Act which provides for destruction of stray dogs by following certain procedure prescribed therein”
2. “The action that may be taken under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Police Act, we add, may not be of the extreme nature of 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”

Statements mentioning about Animal Birth Control program:

1. "No further action with a view to controlling the unruly behavior of stray dogs and controlling their population has been taken by the municipal corporation"
2. "the municipal corporation has received approval to its proposal for allocation of fund of rs.17 crores for the purpose of initiating measures for birth control of the stray dogs from the state government"
3. "we, therefore, grant the permission and direct the state government to release the amount of rs.17 crores at the earliest and preferably within eight weeks from the date of the order. On receipt of the amount, we direct, the corporation shall utilize the amount for taking measures of birth control of the stray dogs"
4. "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"
5. "launch a 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"

Directives regarding setting up a Dog Shelter:

1. “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”
2. “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”

WHAT THE BENCH MISSED OUT ON:

The Bench's directive / statements to animal feeders regarding formal adoption and financing of the stray animals in reality reflects the incapability of the Municipal authorities to seek out a rational and feasible solution to battle stray population explosion.

1. The animal feeders are already financing the looking-after (feeding & medical requirements) and even sterilization (spaying / neutering) of strays without any municipal help or subsidy.
2. The feeders are very well aware of the population-explosion among strays and themselves make efforts towards sterilization of strays which actually is helping the society until a effective & humane Animal Birth Control program is implemented
3. The work that the authorities are supposed to plan & execute isn't being envisioned and when feeders are helping sustain the needy the last thing we need is an artificial famine caused by this biased verdict.
4. It is no different than how British policies had caused the Bengal Famine of 1943 in trying to satisfy / achieve / attain a different goal,  only this time, those starving would be stray animals.
5. The verdict seems preferring convenience over actually implementing a rational solution and gives it a personal your-dog-your-responsibility outlook wherein in reality strays are integral part of society requiring cumulative & constructive efforts from all factions & authorities.
6. It’s welcoming to see the bench pass directives on implementing Animal Birth Control program but instead of it being the focus, the feeders are sought as the main target for the dog-menace issue at hand.

THE REPERCUSSIONS:

The statement & the verdict puts the stray animal population in harms way either through starvation or cruelty by factions of society discriminating against stray animals (dogs in particular)!

Despite animal-cruelty prevention laws in place, stray animals are already having a hard time while being victim of animal-cruelty, ill-treatment & hate due to the following issues (not limited to):

1. Not many people are aware that strays are protected under animal cruelty prevention laws and any act of violence or targeted-hate against them is a criminal & punishable offense which encourages animal haters to act as per their devil will
2. Animal lovers & feeders aren't aware of their rights & many-a-times are over-powered or harassed thus having to let-go looking after strays.
3. Animal-welfare falls below human-welfare & a human issue is prioritized before that of animal plight
4. The police personnel refrain from recording any FIR or complaints related to animal cruelty thinking it's either waste of time & unimportant or are totally unaware of the laws in place.
5. Animals aren't vote banks for the politicians & thus to garner support from the human population, local municipal rulings against animal complaints are passed without giving the animal (or the speaker on his behalf) a fair trial (chance to explain).
6. And many such

THE RIGHT WAY AHEAD:

Sighting all of the repercussions that a verdict would invite, it is wise to deal with the dog-menace issue in a more rational & responsible manner by identifying issues and loop-holes within the functioning of the municipal society.

Following are the alternative propositions to the issue:

1. Instead of barring the feeders (destructive), it is wise to leverage them (constructive) to help implement the Animal Birth Control program.
2. Design a model for feeding of strays leveraging all the housing society premises & personnel at hand and build it as a cumulative effort!
3. Instead of causing friction between various factions of the society (destructive model) how about proposing them ways of working together (constructive model) while satisfying agendas of both parties.

WHAT THIS PETITION SEEKS:

To show support & ultimately seek the following:

Immediate stay or complete revocation of the verdict passed by The Bombay High Court's Nagpur bench in regards to public feeding of stray dogs

Live & Let Live

 

 

REFERENCES:

livelaw.in​

lawtrend.in​

Bengal Famine of 1943 (artificially caused by the policies designed back then)