Posted in Against Animal Cruelty, Against Pet Abandonment, Animal Laws of India, Animals, Articles, Awareness Posters for Animal/Bird Welfare, Be the Change, Court Judgements on Animal Issues - India, Games people play, Information that empowers!, News Reports, Pets, Stories from Ground Zero, Videos on Animals

Continue feeding street animals, they do not transmit Coronavirus to Humans – Mrs. Maneka Gandhi

Senior BJP Leader and Member of Parliament, Maneka Gandhi on Saturday said that “The coronavirus is not transmitted through live animals.” Please scroll below to watch a news clipping, on this subject.

She has also issued a letter on her letterhead earlier today on 23rd March 2020, which is shared below-

All Animal care takers and Feeders can keep this letter by Mrs. Maneka Gandhi, Honourable Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha, Government of India) handy in case they are stopped by authorities while feeding community animals.

Share this letter with your RWA’s and nearest Police Station.

Please take a print out of this letter, if possible or save it on your phone, and keep it handy when you are stepping out for an animal rescue or to feed them.

A humble request to all, be kind towards animals:

Please make two extra Chapatis/Rotis daily in your home for street dogs/Cows and other stray animals who will have no means of feeding themselves since all the Restaurants/Dhabas/Food Carts are closed now due to coronavirus lockdown.

Most of the stray animals survive on leftover food provided by Hotel/Dhaba staff. These animals will starve to death in case of a prolonged lockdown. You can handover these breads to your society/ Apartment staff to be kept outside for animals. Spread the message to all the people in your circle.

Let’s all give it a try, and share this message so more and more people can do the good deed of feeding streer animals in these trying times.

Mrs. Maneka Gandhi addresses the Media to bust myths.

While addressing the press, Maneka Gandhi said, “It has brought in the notice that the government department and several insurance agencies are creating a false panic in the coronavirus through issuing false advisories.”

She said, “These agencies are taking out the advisories on the Coronavirus, which are not confirmed by the health department by saying that nobody should go to live animals.”

“This is completely false and misleading… As the health department of India has said that the animal does not have coronavirus and cannot transmit the virus,” she said.

Adding to the statement, Maneka said, “I would advise the Ministry of Electronics, Insurance companies, and the ministry of railways not to run fake ads on this.”

Posted in Animal Laws of India, Articles, Be the Change, Court Judgements on Animal Issues - India, Do you know?, Do-it-Yourself (DIY) Series, Information that empowers!, News Reports, Street Dogs of India, Take Action!

Street Dog Feeders in Delhi: PLEASE Do not panic, just act responsibly

We are quoting below verbatim from the Facebook post put by, Advocate Ms.Anjali Sharma, so that those who feed street dogs in Delhi and elsewhere can use this information BELOW to counter the misinformation that has spread following recent news reports in Delhi on this subject.

So, please read below, relax and download the Complete order issued by the Delhi High Court below and gear up to counter all the unruly “RWA” members or neighbours who have been fed some fodder by our misreporting Media outlets in the City.

After you have finished reading what we have quoted below, please also read the below links once again.

*2010 Order by Delhi High Court on feeding street dogs

*Indian Street Dogs and their Rights

SO HAS THE DELHI HIGH COURT BANNED STREET DOG FEEDING THROUGH A RECENT ORDER?

OF COURSE NOT. Please read the ACTUAL ORDER which I’m sharing below, & not the trash that some Hindi tabloids have published. The order passed is case specific – involving a case where 2 parties are residing in a common property. One resident objected to the other resident feeding street dogs. He wanted the dogs removed from the area, & wanted their feeding banned. THE COURT HAS NOT DONE THAT. The Court simply said – don’t chain street dogs in the common drive-way of the property in which both parties are residing, don’t feed them there, don’t cause nuisance for the other resident. THATS ALL. This order is in line with the earlier orders passed by the Delhi High Court in 2009 – 2010. Even in those cases, in which I had appeared for the Animal Welfare Board of India, the High Court had emphasised that feeding must be done carefully & in a responsible manner.

– Above text is as quoted by Ms.Anjali Sharma ADVOCATE in her Facebook post on 31st July 2017.

We are quoting below in Hindi, the words of Saurav Gupta, an Animal Welfare activist on this subject so as to calm down the nerves of all of you who communicate in Hindi.

दोस्तों एक भ्रांति और डर आज कुछ पशुप्रेमियों में है जो कुछ कुत्तों को खाना डालते हैं दोस्तों मैं उन्हें आश्वस्त करना चाहता हूँ की ये उच्च न्यायालय का आदेश केवल एक केस में आया है, दो पार्टियों के झगड़े में एक civil-Suit की सुनवाई के दौरान विशेष तौर पर इस एक केस में ये आदेश पारित किया गया है, ये कोई P.I.L या Writ Petition नहीं है जो पूरे दिल्ली में लागू हो ये बस एक केस में एक पार्टी के ख़िलाफ़ आदेश है. कुछ हिंदी अख़बार वाले इस केस में बिना Court Order पढ़े ख़बर लिख रहे हैं और कुत्तों को खाना डालने वाले हमारे पशुप्रेमी उन ख़बरों को पढ़ कर बिना बात के डर रहे हैं.

दोस्तों मैं सप्रीम कोर्ट के एक वरिष्ठ अधिवक्ता के साथ हूँ जिनसे मैंने इस ऑर्डर को डिस्कस कर रहा हूँ उनका कहना है कि हमें इस केस में सप्रीम कोर्ट जाने की या परेशान होने की बिलकुल जर्रूरत नहीं है कोर्ट ने कहा है कि driveway में किसी कुत्ते को ना बांधा जाए और स्ट्रीट डॉग को फ़ीड करते समय पब्लिक की सावधानी व साफ़ सफ़ाई का ध्यान रखा जाए,जिसके लिए मालवीय नगर के S.h.o ko भी उचित कार्यवाही के लिए निर्देशित किया गया है।

कोर्ट ने इस ऑर्डर में कहीं नहीं लिखा की स्ट्रीट dogs को खाना ना डाला जाए, कोर्ट ने 2009 से 2011 तक चले उस हाईकोर्ट के केस के आदेशों को ही जारी रखा है जिसमें हाई कोर्ट ने साफ़ तौर पर दिल्ली पुलिस को निर्देशित किया था की स्ट्रीटdogs को फ़ीडिंग करने वालेपशुप्रेमियो की सुरक्षा सुनिश्चित की जाए तथा एम॰सी॰डी॰(MCD) को निर्देशित किया था कि स्ट्रीट dogs के फ़ीडिंग point तथा फ़ीडिंग का समय निर्धारित किया जाय। उसी आदेशों को इस आदेश में जारी रखा गया है।। बस इतनी सी बात को बढ़ा चढ़ा कर अख़बारों में छापा जा रहा है।

दोस्तों ये ऑर्डर दिल्ली में किसी भी अन्य केस में मान्य नहीं होगा, इसलिए आप किसी भी पशुप्रेमी को परेशान होने की ज़रूरत नहीं है। जब तक हम लोग बैठे हैं तब तक आपको इस तरह के आदेशों में चिंता करने की बिलकुल ज़रूरत नहीं है.

Posted in Animal Birth Control (ABC) Programme/Street Dog Sterilization, Animal Laws of India, Articles, Court Judgements on Animal Issues - India, Do you know?, Information that empowers!, Street Dogs of India

Street Dog Matters related : Interim Order passed by Honourable Supreme Court of India on 18th November 2015

The Interim order of the Supreme Court of India passed on the 18th Nov 2015 while hearing ‘all street dog related matters’ emphatically directs that the laws made viz. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001 have to be implemented and that there shall not be any indiscriminate killing of dogs. The Supreme Court Order observed that “There can be no trace of doubt that there has to be compassion for dogs and that they should not be killed in an indiscriminate manner…”

The key points in this Interim Order issued by the Honourable Supreme Court of India on 18th November 2015 are as follows:

The Order states- “There can be no trace of doubt that there has to be compassion for dogs and they should not be killed in an indiscriminate manner, but indubitably the lives of the human beings are to be saved and one should not suffer due to dog bite because of administrative lapse.

It further reiterates that, “Rule 6 of the Animal Birth Control Rules 2001 enacted under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, provides for obligations of the local authority. Rule 7 deals with capturing/sterilisation/ immunisation/release. Rule 8 deals with identification and recording and Rule 9 provides for euthanasia of street dogs. Rule 10 deals with furious or dumb rabid dogs.” and goes on to add that, ” As we find, the local authorities have a sacrosanct duty to provide sufficient number of dog pounds, including animal kennels/shelters, which may be managed by the animal welfare organizations, that apart, it is also incumbent upon the local authorities to provide requisite number of dog vans with ramps for the capture and transportation of street dogs; one driver and two trained dog catchers for each dog van; an ambulance-cum-clinical van as mobile centre for sterlisation and immunisation; incinerators for disposal of carcasses and periodic repair of shelter or pound. Rule 7 has its own significance. The procedure has to be followed before any steps are taken. Rules 9 and 10 take care of the dogs which are desirable to be euthanised.”

To explain to our readers Rule 9 – it means that only mortally wounded or terminally ill dogs i.e.when and only when a dog is unfit for survival/has no chance of recovery/healing which is medically proven by a Government certified Veterinary Doctor and it’s survival causes more pain for it is when u can think of euthanising.

….and then the order hammers home the point, that for now that the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2001, (for short, ‘the 2001 Rules’) shall prevail over the provisions contained in any local Act/Municipality Act by stating that, “for the present it is suffice to say that all the State municipal corporations, municipal committees, district boards and local bodies shall be guided by the Act and the Rules and it is the duty and obligation of the Animal Welfare Board to see that they are followed with all seriousness. It is also the duty of all the municipal corporations to provide infrastructure as mandated in the statute and the rules. Once that is done, we are disposed to think for the present that a balance between compassion to dogs and the lives of human being, which is appositely called a glorious gift of nature, may harmoniously co-exist.”.

And towards the end of this Interim Order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court of India, instructions are laid out for the Local bodies to follow, “The local authorities shall file affidavits including what kind of infrastructures they have provided, as required under the law. Needless to emphasize, no innovative method or subterfuge should be adopted not to carry out the responsibility under the 1960 Act or the 2001 Rules. Any kind of laxity while carrying out statutory obligations, is not countenanced in law.”

A copy of the order passed today be sent to the Chief Secretary of each of the States and the competent authority of Union Territories, so that they can follow the same in letter and spirit. We would also request all the High Courts not to pass any order relating to the 1960 Act and the 2001 Rules pertaining to dogs. Needless to say, all concerned as mentioned herein-above, shall carry out this order and file their respective affidavits as directed“…are the concluding lines of this order as the matter gets listed for Final Hearing and Disposal on 9th March 2016.

The Hindu on SC Order 19112015

The Press Release issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), a statutory body under the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Government of India on the above stated order, is shared below.

Posted in Animal Birth Control (ABC) Programme/Street Dog Sterilization, Animal Laws of India, Articles, Court Judgements on Animal Issues - India, Information that empowers!

Recent Developments on Street Dog related petitions in Delhi High Court (August 2015)

As shared by Ms. Anjali Sharma, Board Member and Legal Advisor to the Animal Welfare Board of India, Ministry of Environment , Forest and Climate Change, Government of India.

17th August 2015_Delhi HC on DogsAnd this is what the 5th August 2015 Delhi High Court order reads like:

As per this order, Ms. Sharma explains, ” (i) what is necessary is that the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules be implemented in letter and spirit ; & (ii) The primary responsibility of implementing the Rules is of the municipalities. (Meaning thereby that they have to fund it adequately, provide the infrastructure, etc.). Not only has the Delhi High Court Order asked the 3 municipal corporations of Delhi, & the N.D.M.C., to file status reports giving sterilization numbers, but specifically asked whether the STRAY DOGS HAVE BEEN RETURNED BACK TO THE LOCALITIES after sterilization.”

5th August 2015_Delhi HC Order on a Street Dog Petition_Page 1 5th August 2015_Delhi HC Order on a Street Dog Petition_Page 2

Posted in Against Animal Cruelty, Animal Laws of India, Court Judgements on Animal Issues - India, News Reports, Videos on Animals

Supreme Court of India stands up for Animal Rights, bans cruel bull-taming sport ‘Jallikattu’

SC stands up for animal rights, bans Jallikattu
The Supreme Court of India in a landmark and historic judgement passed in the morning of 7th May 2014 has favoured constitutional status for rights of animals like citizens and banned the use (and abuse) of Bulls and Bullocks in Jallikattu, Bullock Cart Racing and all in other ‘sports and entertainment’ based events and/or festivities.

In a major step towards protecting animals from human cruelty, the Supreme Court on Wednesday 7th May 2014, banned the popular post-harvest Jallikattu (taming the bull) or bullfights in Tamil Nadu and bullock-cart racing in Maharashtra, Punjab and other states, saying they violated provisions of the 50-year-old Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. 

Significantly, the court favoured constitutional status for rights of animals like citizens. It said, “Parliament, it is expected, would elevate rights of animals to that of constitutional rights, as done by many of the countries around the world, so as to protect their dignity and honour.” 


A bench of Justices K S Radhakrishnan and P C Ghose struck down as illegal the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Jallikattu Act, 2009, and said, “Bulls cannot be used as performing animals, either for the Jallikattu events or bullock-cart races in the state of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and elsewhere in the country.” 

Before banning Jallikattu and cart-racing, the bench extensively narrated behavioural patterns of the animal. “Bulls adopt flight or fight response when they are frightened or threatened and this instinctual response to a perceived threat is what is being exploited in Jallikattu or bullock-cart races,” it said. 

“During Jallikattu, many animals are observed to engage in a flight response as they try to run away from the arena when they experience fear or pain, but cannot do this since the area is completely enclosed. Jallikattu demonstrates a link between actions of humans and the fear, distress and pain experienced by bulls,” it said. 

“Studies indicate that rough and abusive handling of bulls compromise welfare and for increasing fear in bulls, often, they are pushed, hit, prodded, abused, causing mental as well as physical harm,” said Justice Radhakrishnan, who authored the judgment for the bench. 

Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) through senior advocate Raj Panjwani, said even if Jallikattu was conducted as per the Tamil Nadu legislation, it would still violate provisions of PCA Act as the event involved causing pain and suffering to bulls, which was prohibited under Section 11(1)(a) of the central law. 

AWBI said Jallikattu and bullock-cart races had no historical, cultural and religious significance and told the court that even if they had, it should not be permitted as it violated the PCA Act. 

While declaring that the rights of bulls against cruelty was inviolable, the bench gave a general direction to the governments and AWBI “to take appropriate steps to see that the persons-in-charge or care of animals take reasonable measures to ensure the well-being of animals”. 

This could put all pet owners, dairy farm owners and animal keepers on notice against causing cruelty to them. However, the court did not deal with a related issue – whether bullock-carts, which are rural India’s sole transportation medium both for men and material, were included in this general direction. 

The court also gave the following directions: 

  • AWBI and governments are directed to take steps to prevent the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on animals, since their rights have been statutorily protected under Section 3 and 11 of the PCA Act.
  • AWBI to ensure that provisions of Section 11(1) of the PCA Act is scrupulously followed, meaning thereby that the person-in-charge or care of animals shall not incite any animal to fight against a human being or another animal
  • If the court’s directions are not complied with scrupulously, it would be the duty of the government and AWBI to bring to book the violator.

Credits: Above News Report has been taken from Times of India and is penned by TOI Correspondent Dhananjay Mahapatra

For those readers of ‘Jaagruti’, who don’t understand what ‘Jallikattu’ is and why the Supreme Court Order on this sport to be banned should be welcomed, please watch this video