The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that both civic authorities and individuals who feed stray dogs could be held responsible for injuries or deaths caused by animal attacks, Live Law reported.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria verbally observed that for every “dog bite, death or injury caused to children or elderly”, the court would “fix heavy compensation” on the state for “not doing anything”.
“Liability and accountability [will also be placed] on those who are saying we are feeding dogs,” Live Law quoted Nath as observing. “Do it [feed the dogs], take them to your house. Why should dogs be loitering around biting, scaring people?”
The court made the remarks while monitoring the compliance with its order passed on November 7, which stated that all government premises, such as hospitals, schools and railway stations, must be properly fenced to prevent stray dogs from entering.
The court had said that the local authorities concerned would be responsible for removing stray dogs from such areas and placing them in designated shelters after vaccinating and sterilising them.
Stray dogs picked up from these premises must not be released in the same areas from which they were taken away, the judges had directed in November.
Several animal rights groups had later sought changes to the order, objecting to the ban on releasing the dogs in the same areas, Live Law reported.
In July, a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan had taken suo motu cognisance of concerns about stray dogs in public places based on a media report. On August 11, it had directed authorities in the National Capital Territory of Delhi to immediately begin relocating street dogs and build shelters for 5,000 to 6,000 animals within six weeks.
However, the case was shifted to a three-judge bench headed by Nath two days later. On August 22, the court stayed the directions given by the two-judge bench and said that stray dogs that are picked up should be released back into the same area after being sterilised, dewormed and immunised.
The court, however, had said that dogs displaying aggressive behaviour, or those infected with rabies, should not be released.
On November 3, the court had also taken serious note of government employees feeding stray dogs within office premises, observing that such conduct violated its directions mandating the creation of designated feeding zones for canines.
Also Read:
You’ve read Scroll.
Now help sustain it
Scroll is funded by readers, not corporate owners. If you believe our work matters, support our newsroom. Become a member today!
We’re not driven by clicks or corporate interests – just honest, independent reporting. Keep us going. Support Scroll today!