New Delhi: The Supreme Court, during the hearing in the case of stray dogs, said that one should also advise the dogs not to bite people. The court said that no one can read the mind of an animal whether the dog is in a mood to bite or not.
This matter came before the bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria. Justice Nath said that dogs can bite or chase someone when the person is on a two-wheeler or bicycle, and the person can fall or meet with an accident.
Justice Nath asked senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, “While they run on the road, it in itself is dangerous for the passing vehicles, especially two-wheelers and cyclists… Have you been on a two-wheeler or not”, to which Sibal replied that he had in the early days of his career.
Justice Nath said that cutting is not the only issue. Dogs chase people on bicycles. On this, Sibal, who was appearing for one of the parties in the case, said that not every dog does this and it is important to identify it.
Justice Nath said, how will you recognize which dog is in which mood in the morning, you do not know. Sibal questioned whether the solution is to provide shelter to all the dogs. On this the bench said that there should be an exercise to ensure that the roads or streets are free from dogs.
Sibal said that the dogs live in the compound and they live in the university. When he was in university, there were dogs there and no one bit them. Sibal said that there are many dogs in JNU. On this Justice Mehta asked whether he was serious. Justice Mehta told Sibal that his information was outdated. NLS Bangalore has reported several attacks.
Justice Nath said that there should be an exercise to prevent incidents of dog bites. He said that no one is saying that the dogs should be removed and shot, no… the roads will have to be cleared of dogs. Sibal stressed on adopting scientific method to solve this issue. He stressed that placing all dogs in shelters is not the solution.
Sibal gave suggestions to deal with dog bites and rehabilitation of unruly dogs. Justice Mehta said, “The only thing that is missing is the counseling of the dog so that once it is released back, the dog should not bite…” Sibal said that this may have been said in a light tone and I am sure that is not what you meant.
Justice Mehta questioned that as far as institutions are concerned, they are not roads and asked, why do you need dogs in court premises, universities. The bench said that the rules say that they (dogs) should be released back in the same area. He asked how then the institutions would be free from dogs. Should they be left on the streets? Hearing on the case is going on.
On November 7 last year, the Supreme Court had said that in view of the alarming increase in incidents of dog bites in institutional areas like educational institutions, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands and railway stations, it is necessary to issue directions in the interest of public safety, health and management of stray dogs. The court directed that such dogs should be taken to the designated shelter.
The Supreme Court was hearing a suo motu case, which was initiated on July 28 over a media report on cases of rabies being bitten by stray dogs, especially among children, in Delhi.
The Supreme Court had expanded the scope of the stray dogs case beyond the borders of Delhi-National Capital and had directed that all the states and union territories should be made parties in this case.
