‘Cruelty to animals would be against constitutional ethos’: when Bombay HC stepped in for stray dogs
In March 2023, the Bombay High Court cautioned the managing committee of a housing society and stated that treating stray dogs with cruelty “can never be an acceptable approach from persons of civil society”.
The court cautioned the concerned managing committee and other members of the society that "to hate stray dogs and/or treat them with cruelty can never be an acceptable approach from persons of civil society." (Express File) The Bombay High Court has time and again voiced concern over housing societies taking action against residents who feed stray dogs or using coercive methods to scare the animals, warning that cruelty to such animals “would be against constitutional ethos.”
Recently, the court pulled up a housing society in Navi Mumbai for violating a resident’s fundamental rights after it prevented the woman’s domestic help from visiting her because she fed stray dogs in the area.
In January 2023, the high court, while hearing another plea against six residents of the same Navi Mumbai society — Seawoods Estates Limited (SEL) — over fines imposed by the managing committee for feeding strays, had observed that a mechanism needs to be evolved to regulate the population of stray dogs. It had pulled up SEL for not allowing drivers, domestic helps and other service providers to the petitioners’ houses.
Rule 20 of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, which was challenged by the Navi Mumbai society through another petition, outlines responsibilities of the Residents’ Welfare Association (RWA) or local authorities to make necessary arrangements for residents who feed and provide care to community animals living on its premises.
In March 2023, the Bombay High Court heard another petition filed by animal lover Paromita Puthran, a member of the RNA Royale Park Cooperative Housing Society Limited in suburban Kandivali West. Puthran had challenged the decision of the society’s managing committee to hire bouncers to stop members from feeding stray dogs, among other obstructions.
The court had then cautioned the concerned managing committee and other members of the society that “to hate stray dogs and/or treat them with cruelty can never be an acceptable approach from persons of civil society, as an act of cruelty to such animals would be against the constitutional ethos and the statutory provisions.”
The following month, while hearing Puthran’s plea, the high court had observed that residents of housing societies are obliged to provide adequate water to animals, especially considering the onset of summer.
The court had also directed the Kandivali housing society to entertain complaints by any members regarding security guards using coercive methods causing any scare/threat to the animals by using sticks, in turn aggravating the behaviour of animals “so that appropriate action can be taken against such security guards”.
In August last year, the Bombay High Court directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to constitute an Animal Welfare Committee within a fortnight to decide a dispute between Puthran and the society. The society had claimed that the stray dogs had become aggressive due to indiscriminate feeding that resulted in incidents wherein the canines bit or attacked elderly people and children.
In April 2023, hearing a plea by animal activist Vineeta Tandon from Pune, the high court had directed the police to assist the civic body in reintroducing the stray dogs captured from Brahma Suncity Society in the Wadgaon Sheri area to their original surroundings. Some members of the society had objected to releasing the dogs. Over 50 strays had been kept at shelters maintained by the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) after a stray dog bit a child.
The court had noted that the society was bound to abide by the laws and court orders for the care, welfare and maintenance of dogs, and therefore it cannot obstruct the PMC.
Share
