Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain PIL On Stray Dog Issue, Asks Petitioner To Move HC
The Supreme Court (on July 15) dismissed the petition pertaining to the prevention of mishaps arising due to stray dogs issue. At the very outset, the bench of justices JK Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal pointed out the recent Supreme Court order. Therein, the Court had disposed of a batch of petitions relating to the stray dog issue, stating that in view of Animal Birth Control Rules,...
The Supreme Court (on July 15) dismissed the petition pertaining to the prevention of mishaps arising due to stray dogs issue.
At the very outset, the bench of justices JK Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal pointed out the recent Supreme Court order. Therein, the Court had disposed of a batch of petitions relating to the stray dog issue, stating that in view of Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, the matter can now be decided by the respective High Courts.
“Considering all the intervening developments and more specifically, the enactment of the new Rules putting in place mechanisms for preventing the infliction of unnecessary pains and sufferings on animals, more specifically the canines, we intend to close the instant proceedings, leaving it open for each one of the parties to pursue their remedies on occasion so arises, if so advised, before the Constitutional Courts, other Forums having respective jurisdiction, in accordance with law.,” the Court had ordered while disposing of another batch of cases on May 10.
Yesterday, the petitioner-in-person, Sabu Stephen, pleaded that “Safety of the people shall be the supreme law. My brothers and sisters…for more than two decades are suffering due to the excessiveness of stray animals across India.”
However, the Court promptly asked the petitioner, “Have you seen that we have delegated all the matters to the State High Courts in the light of the 2023 Rules?”
Thereafter, the Court firmly asked why the petitioner couldn't approach the High Court and added, “Why jump to this Court? The local circumstances, area, everything the High Court knows better. Why can't the High Court deal with this?”
Noticing that the seven ministries, including the Ministry of Panchyat Raj and Finance, have been impleaded as parties, Justice Bindal remarked, “Is any ministry left in the Union of India? The state is not even the party in this matter?”
The petitioner however pleaded “All this misshaping happening to our dearest ones? What we will do my, lords? Where we can go? The ultimate solution is with this Hon'ble Court across India?”
Notwithstanding, the Bench refused to entertain the matter and dismissed the plea.
Case Details: SABU STEEPHEN VS. UNION OF INDIA., DIARY NO. - 42441/2019