Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

There can be no trace of doubt that there has to be compassion for dogs and they should not be killed in an indiscriminate manner, but indubitably the lives of the human beings are to be saved and one should not suffer due to dog bite because of administrative lapse.

In course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, except the Animal Welfare Board, would pyramid their case on the plinth and foundation that the dogs, who have various uses for human society and have served SLP(C) 691/09 the society for centuries and also have constitutional protection under Article 51A of the Constitution of India and the laws made, have to be taken care of. The resistance from the other side is that a bite by a stray dog creates menace in the society and in the name of compassion for dogs, the lives of human beings cannot be sacrificed.

Any other method is strictly prohibited.

(c) create public awareness, solicit co-operation and funding.

(d) provide guidelines to pet dog owners and commercial breeders from time to time.

(e) get a survey done of the number of street dogs by an independent agency.

(f) take such steps for monitoring the dog bite cases to ascertain the reasons of dog bite, the area where it took place and whether it was from a stray or a pet dog.

Learned counsel appearing for both the sides are at liberty to file affidavits which may contain the data of the dog bites and the steps taken by the local bodies with regard to destruction/removal of the stray dogs. They are also at liberty to file data pertaining to population of stray dogs. The local authorities shall file affidavits including what kind of infrastructures they have provided, as required under the law. Needless to emphasize, no innovative method or subterfuge should be adopted not to carry out the responsibility under the 1960 Act or the 2001 Rules. Any kind of laxity while carrying out statutory obligations, is not countenanced in law.