While hearing matters relating to stray dog management, the Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain allegations of harassment and violence against women dog feeders at the Apex Court level, firmly holding that such acts constitute criminal offences and must be addressed through FIRs and statutory remedies before local authorities, Magistrates, and High Courts.
The issue arose when an animal rights activist, through senior counsel, alleged that women dog feeders across several States were being assaulted, molested, publicly humiliated, and threatened by self-styled “anti-feeder vigilantes,” with authorities allegedly failing to register FIRs despite repeated complaints.
The submissions sought the Apex Court’s intervention, arguing that earlier court directions on stray dogs were being misused to justify harassment. The Bench, however, repeatedly flagged that these allegations related to individual criminal acts and law-and-order failures, not the limited question before it concerning regulation of stray dogs in public spaces.
A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta, and Justice N.V. Anjaria made it clear that criminal law remedies cannot be bypassed by directly invoking the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. Justice Nath underscored that harassment or assault of women squarely attracts penal consequences, observing, “If someone is harassing women, it’s a crime under the Penal Code. Get FIRs registered. There are procedures available for how to get FIRs registered.”
The Court reiterated that its earlier stray dog-related orders were narrowly confined and did not authorise private individuals to act as enforcers. Declining to widen the scope of the proceedings, the Bench advised aggrieved persons to approach Magistrates or High Courts, in line with established law, including the principles governing mandatory FIR registration.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
