Stray dog case: SC warns states of heavy fine for every bite, death; feeders to be held liable

In a stern warning to state governments, the Supreme Court on Tuesday indicated it would fix “heavy compensation” for every dog bite and death caused by strays. The court noted that the impact of a dog bite is “lifelong” and suggested that individuals or organisations feeding strays must also bear legal liability.

“For every dog bite, for every death, we will be likely fixing heavy compensation for states for not making requisite arrangements,” the Supreme Court said, according to Bar and Bench.

“And also liability to dog feeders. You take them to your house, keep them, why should they be allowed to roam around, biting, chasing? The effect of a dog bite is lifelong,” the court noted.

The Supreme Court bench, comprising justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and NV Anjaria, was hearing a case concerning stray dogs in India.

'Are you for real?'

During the hearing, Justice Sandeep Mehta told a counsel: “Are you for real?” He pointed to statistics shared by a “young counsel” of orphan children on the streets. His comments came after a counsel argued that “children need to be removed from the streets first. Not dogs. Children need shelters.”

“A young counsel just showed us statistics of orphan children on the streets. Perhaps some lawyers could argue for the adoption of those children. Since 2011, when I was elevated, these are the longest arguments I have heard. And till now no one has argued so long for human beings,” Justice Sandeep Mehta was quoted by Bar and Bench as saying.

The court asked, “Who should be made responsible when a 9-year-old child is killed by dogs which are fed by a particular organisation? Should the organisation not be made liable for damages?”

The court listed the matter for further hearing at 2 PM on 20 January.

ABC rules

The Supreme Court also heard extensive arguments on the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules.

Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy said the ABC Rules were not limited to population control. She referred to Article 51 of the Constitution, which calls for compassion towards all living creatures.

“The ABC Rules are the result of Parliament applying its mind. That is the society we want to be,” she said. “Why do we oppose capital punishment? Because we believe it dehumanises us. When we talk about removing species, we are dehumanising ourselves. Compassion cannot be in short supply.”

She further argued that killing won’t diminish the numbers, but sterilisation will.

“If the regulators did their job better, we would not be living in the catastrophe we are in now. Money should be given to the organisations working. The program centres are underutilising the funds that are set up,” she said.

The stray dogs case so far

The matter gained national attention last year after a bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan directed Delhi municipal authorities to round up and shelter stray dogs. This led to mass protests from animal rights groups.

That order was later modified by the present three-judge bench. It mandated vaccination and the release of sterilised dogs instead of permanent sheltering.

During the hearing on 7 December, the Supreme Court highlighted the increasing number of dog bite incidents in the country and criticised the municipal authorities and other local bodies for their failure to implement the Animal Birth Control (ABC) rules.

During the hearing on 8 January, the court said that a dog can often sense people who are afraid of it and will attack when it detects that fear.