At least two high courts have stayed the implementation of a central government circular banning the import, breeding, and sale of 22 dog breeds deemed “dangerous for human life”, The Indian Express newspaper reported. A third is also hearing a challenge to the circular.
While the Karnataka High Court stayed the circular in the territory of the state on Tuesday, the Calcutta High Court ordered a partial stay on the circular on Thursday. The same day, the Delhi High Court sought the central government’s response to a plea challenging the circular.
The circular, issued by O.P. Chaudhary, joint secretary in the ministry of fisheries, animal husbandry, and dairying, on March 12 directed the chief secretaries of all states and Union territories to ensure that no permissions are issued to sell, breed, or keep these “ferocious” breeds. The circular also said those already owning such dogs must get them neutered or spayed. The chief secretary is the top bureaucrat in the government of a state or Union territory.
On December 6, a division bench of the Delhi High Court comprising acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna had directed the Centre to decide on a representation by a law firm about “dangerous” breeds “expeditiously”, preferably within three months. The firm, Legal Attorneys & Barristers, had initiated a public interest litigation to ban these breeds, contending that they were banned in over 35 countries, including the UK and the USA. The circular was issued as a follow-up to this order.
On Tuesday, the Karnataka High Court heard a petition filed jointly by a professional dog handler and the owner of a rottweiler, who claimed that the expert committee that had recommended the circular had not consulted all stakeholders. Justice M. Nagaprasanna said that until the deputy solicitor general of India produces “those documents that went into the decision-making of the impugned circular”, it “shall remain stayed” in Karnataka. The justice noted that the circular applies across the country and could have a “devastating effect” on the breeds listed.
The deputy solicitor general argued that the circular was issued in response to the Delhi High Court’s order of December 6. Justice Nagaprasanna, however, pointed out that the high court had directed that “all stakeholders” be consulted. The petitioners claimed that the Kennel Club of India, official body for registering litters in the country, was not heard. They said identifying a breed as “ferocious” and “dangerous for human life” required “profound expertise”. Also, several breeds listed in the circular are identical to other breeds that are not listed. The hearing will continue on April 5.
In Calcutta, dog owner Tanmay Dutta moved the high court against the State of West Bengal, arguing that no law in the country permits killing or banning dogs. Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya directed the Centre to file an affidavit with details of the expert committee set up to study the issue.
The court felt there was substance in the petitioner’s argument that the directive to compulsorily sterilize dogs of these breeds could be fatal, particularly for puppies, the newspaper reported. Justice Bhattacharya did not, however, extend the stay on the circular to the directive banning the import and sale of the breeds listed.
The Delhi High Court is also hearing a plea against the order for mandatory sterilization of dogs of certain breeds. “By failing to adhere to established scientific protocols or engage in comprehensive research methodologies regarding canine behaviour, temperament, and risk factors associated with dog-related incidents, the impugned notification lacks the credibility and legitimacy required for such regulatory interventions,” a plea filed by Sikander Singh Thakur and others against the Union of India said. A single bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has asked the central government to respond.
Sandy Pawpaw
Sandy Pawpaw is a fierce advocate of unleashing the animal in, and with, you.