Karnataka High Court Orders ₹10 Lakh Compensation For Death Of 2-Yr-Old In Stray Dog Attack

A single Judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj sitting at Dharwad said, "There is a public duty and/or statutory duty vested with the municipal authorities to safeguard the citizens residing in the area from attack of street dogs."

The bench made the observation while allowing the petition filed by a mason- Yusub, who lost his 22 months old son to an attack by stray dogs back in 2018, and granting compensation to the tune of Rs. 10 lakh, payable by the Zilla Panchayat. It also awarded Rs. 20,000 litigation expense.

The court also issued following directions to be followed by the respondent-authorities, within four months:

1. The Animal Welfare Organisations and the Monitoring Committee as contemplated under the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001 to ensure complete sterilisation and vaccination of all healthy stray dogs, particularly, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be;

2. It is advisable to entrust the responsibility of sterilisation and vaccination to NGOs or other agencies in a decentralised manner. A Report of their activities must be submitted to the Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be, on a regular basis for the latter's scrutiny and verification;

3. Stray dogs which are incurably ill or mortally wounded as diagnosed by a qualified veterinarian to be euthanized in terms of Rule 9 of the said ABC Rules, 2001;

4. Furious or dumb rabid dogs to be dealt with in terms of the Rule 10 of the said Rules;

5. Dogs which do not come within the scope of Rule 9 or 10 but which are a menace or cause nuisance irrespective of whether there is evidence of such dogs having mauled or bitten children or adults could be exterminated in the manner specified in Rule 9 of the ABC Rules, 2001 under the orders of the Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be;

6. Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be, must take serious note of complaints with regard to unruly stray dogs by setting up a complaint cell and act in accordance with law and also having regard to the observations made herein above, particularly having regard to Section 11 of 1960 Act read with Rules 9 and 10 of the ABC Rules 2001 in the matter of culling of stray dogs;

7. Sterilisation and vaccination of stray dogs must be carried out on a regular basis and by holding additional camps for such purpose at the initiative of the Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be;

8. The Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be, to ensure that the Rules for clearance of Solid Waste be enforced, so that garbage found in the surroundings of people inhabited area, is not a reason for stray dog menace;

9. The Zilla Panchayath, Taluk Panchayat or Village Panchayat as the case may be, to frame guidelines for the grant of compensation to the victims of attacks by the stray dogs;

10. The owners of dogs ensure that their pet dogs are not a menace or cause nuisance in public places. It would be mandatory for the owners of the dogs to take out their dogs on public roads or public places along with a leash and not let their dogs loose on the streets, so as to avoid a confrontation with street dogs or other pet dogs;

11. The citizens must also bear in mind that street dogs also have a right to live and therefore, must refrain from attacking these dogs by stone Throwing or by beating etc. They must ensure that children do not go near the stray dogs either to play with them or to feed them.

The bench directed the authority to file a compliance report. It also directed the state government to make necessary arrangements and provide the requisite funds for the Zilla Panchayat to comply with the above directions.

Case Title: YUSUB S/O MOHAMUSAB SANADI v THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Case No: WRIT PETITION NO. 110352 OF 2019

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 232

Date of Order: 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

Appearance: Advocate SANTOSH PUJARI for petitioner; HCGP PRAVEEN K. UPPAR, FOR R1 AND R3; Advocate V. SHIVARAJ HIREMATH, FOR R2, R4

Click Here To Read/Download Order