Animal Welfare Board of India

by

Veterinary services must go on, animals can’t and shouldn’t suffer during COVID-19, PM Modi & Central Govt tells states

Please carry printouts of the PM’s advisory to the States about street animal welfare, and the letter from the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Upamanyu Basu, to show the authorities if they stop you from feeding.

Please also keep an eye out for animals that may be suffering inside closed pet shops and inform the authorities immediately.

Sharing the same below for ready reference:

—

News Article in ‘The Print’ dated 23rd March by Journalist Sanya Dhingra (Please scroll below for relevant images, that you can download, print and keep handy, while you feed/look after animals in need and street animals in general. This is the time to show humanity, kindness and compassion to all living beings)

The Narendra Modi government has told all states to ensure that medical help for animals is treated as an essential service, which does not get suspended during COVID-19 lockdowns across the country.

While several states announced lockdowns Sunday in a bid to arrest the spread of the deadly disease in India, they did not include veterinary services in the list of essential services that would be exempt under it.

In a letter addressed to all chief secretaries dated 23rd March, the Centre said, “It is requested that veterinary hospitals and dispensaries in the state, including private veterinary clinics, veterinary pathologies, animal shelters etc. function in the normal course and the veterinary services be considered in the list of ‘Essential Services’.”

The letter, written by the joint secretary of the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Upamanyu Basu said, “It is necessary to ensure continuous emergency services in the animal husbandry and veterinary sector, especially in emergent animal health issues situations.

“These May include but are not restricted to, emergency services like disease diagnosis and treatment, monitoring of any emergency livestock and poultry diseases, immediate disease reporting, etc.”

However, the government has urged veterinarians and other related officials to ensure strict personal hygiene and avoid public gatherings.

‘Animals and birds should not suffer during lockdown’

On the same day, the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) wrote another letter to all states emphasising that all law enforcement agencies ensure that animals and birds do not suffer due to hunger during the lockdown due to COVID-19.

Please carry printouts of the PM’s advisory to the States about street animal welfare, and the letter from the Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Upamanyu Basu, to show the authorities if they stop you from feeding. Please also keep an eye out for animals that may be suffering inside closed pet shops and inform the authorities immediately.

“This is a valuable service consistently provided by compassionate individuals and the absence of it may cause a large number of animals and birds to suffer and die and carcasses of the dead animals and birds may further spread different diseases amongst community which will be difficult to control,” Dr O.P. Chaudhary, Director of the AWBI has written.

Meanwhile Delhi Government has issued the following order as well.

“The situation is quite alarming,” BJP MP Maneka Gandhi said. “In some places, food is being stopped…No animal grains and chara is being allowed to come to Haryana from UP. Even pedigree from Hyderabad is being stopped by Mumbai,” she said.

“Animals and birds cannot be allowed to starve in the country in this manner.”

by

Coronavirus cannot spread through live animals, continue feeding street animals. This is the moment to be kind and humane.

The Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), a statutory body under the Government of India, has written to the chief secretaries of all State governments and Union Territories to ensure the well-being of pet animals amid the Corona virus threat.

In a circular, AWBI Chairman Mr. O. P Chaudhary said that, “It was brought to the notice of the Board that the animal owners are depriving their pets of proper food, water or shelter due to the increasing threat of the virus.”

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has clarified that dogs and cats are not involved in spreading infection in the current episode of coronavirus infection. “The Board has already issued an advisory to the State government sand UTs to see that the stray animals are taken care of by the local bodies as it their responsibility,” Chaudhary said.

Hence, the AWBI chief has requested the governments to create awareness about animal welfare and advise them against abandoning their pets.

Even fimstars, like Arjun Kapoor, Twinkle Khanna, Kriti Sanon, Mini Mathur and many more kind hearts, are urging their fans and followers on their Instagram feeds to continue feeding street animals, more so now, when eateries, their primary source of scavenging for food, are shut.

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

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.

by

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

by

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.
THE COMPLETE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT ON JALLIKATTU DATED  7th MAY 2014 CAN BE ACCESSED BY CLICKING HERE

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
by

Noida Federation instructions to Resident Welfare Associations regarding lawful manner of dealing with street dogs

After the Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon’s directive to Presidents of all Gurgaon-based Residential Welfare Associations (RWAs) to stop harassing people/residents who have pets and tend to street dogs, comes the below mentioned letter issued by Federation of Noida Resident Welfare Associations to all its member RWAs in Noida, apprising them on the lawful manner of dealing with street dogs and the people who tend to them, feed them, get them sterilized and vaccinated.

So, for all those of you who stay in Noida and are being harassed by your respective RWA for feeding and tending to street dogs, please take note of this important letter, download it from the link below and use it to fight your case for the animals you care for.

Download by clicking here – Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding lawful manner of dealing with street dogs

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 1 of the letter

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 1 of the letter

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 2 of the Letter

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 2 of the Letter

Please also read:

Gurgaon Municipal Corporation’s Directive to Presidents of Residential Welfare Societies to stop harassing people who have pets and tend to street dogs

by

To all those of you who are being harassed by their neighbourhood for tending to animals….

Please remember that for the animals, if not for yourself, you need to be strong and fight this out.

While you can approach local animal welfare organisations or animal activists, but in the end, it is a fight you will have to fight on your own, for yourself and the animals you care for…

  • If talking to people and explaining them the below mentioned laws and constitutional provisions doesn’t help, then, whether you like it or you don’t, you need to approach the Police and file an F.I.R or Police Complaint against all the people who are harassing you, abusing you, threatening to kill/harm you/your property and the dogs/other animals you care for.
  • Be sure to mention full names and addresses of all the people who are harassing you and give complete true account of the matter, without exaggerating facts – take help of the points stated below to put your grievances and facts across and mention why you are seeking help from the Police and reporting this matter.
  • There is no law that prohibits feeding of street animals, and citizens who choose to do so are in fact performing a duty cast upon them by the Constitution of India. Persons, who are trying to interfere with their effort, or display aggression, can be held liable for having committed the offense described in the Indian Penal Code and criminal intimidation.
  • Moreover, as per Indian law, street dogs cannot be beaten or driven away. They can merely be sterilized in the manner envisaged in the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001(Rules under Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA), 1960), vaccinated, and then returned back to their original locations.
  • If your municipality is not doing the same, you can file a Police Complaint or FIR against the local Municipal Corporation for flouting the laws and rules mentioned above, which need to be complied with throughout the country, as PCA Act is a Central Act, i.e. it is applicable across the country and the local Police has been mandated with the responsibility of enforcing this act and reporting/booking violations/offenders.

Constitutional provisions:

  • Article 51A of the Constitutional Law of India, speaks about the duties of every citizen of India. One of these duties includes having compassion for living creatures (Article 51 A (g) of the Indian Constitution). Those who look after animals and other creatures of God are thus protected under the Constitution.

 

  • Article 19 of the Constitution of India, deals with right to freedom and in this freedom are included the right to profession, occupation, trade and business. Therefore, it means that every citizen has the right to occupation and if someone has taken the caring of animals as his occupation, it is legal and he has every right to carry on with his occupation.

Legal provisions:

In a Judgment passed by the Delhi Court, it has been stated that the Animal Welfare Board of India and the Municipal Authorities have in the guidelines issued by them specified the problem often faced by individuals and families who adopt and feed stray animals. The court says that it is necessary to bring into record that these individuals and families who adopt stray animals are doing a great service to humanity as they are acting in the aid and assistance of Municipal Authorities by providing these animals with food and shelter and also by getting them vaccinated and sterilized. Without assistance of such persons no local Municipal Authority can successfully carry out its ABC programme. The Court has proceeded to say that the local police and the municipal authorities are under obligation not only to encourage such adoption but also to ensure protection to such persons who come forward to take care of these animals specifically the community or neighbourhood dogs so that they are not subjected to any kind of cruelty, finally, the Court has said that every individual has the right to live his life in the manner he wants and it is necessary that the society and the community recognize it.

  • If you are a woman/girl who is being abused/harassed/threatened by neighbours/people around for being kind to animals, please also note that you can lodge F.I.Rs against these people Under Section 509 of Indian Penal Code (U/S 509 of IPC) – which is a cognizable offence.
  • Under the Govt. of India, Animal Birth Control Rules 2001 (drafted under the Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960), no sterilized dogs can be relocated from their area. As per five different High Court orders, sterilized dogs have to remain in their original areas. If the dog is not sterilized, the Society can simply ask an animal welfare organization to sterilize and vaccinate the dog. They cannot relocate them. Relocation is not permissible, as it would cause more problems such as an increase in dog bites as new dogs will move into the area who are unfamiliar with residents and therefore more likely to be hostile. All problems of stray animals have to be handled within the institutional framework available. No association, recognized or unrecognized, shall take recourse to any action regarding stray animals on their own, either themselves or through any person employed by them like security guards. While residents and Associations are free to address institutional agencies for redressal of grievances in this matter, no resident/association will interfere with the freedom of other residents in caring and attending animals.
  • Section 11 of The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 forbids the displacement of Animals from its natural environment into an environment that is hostile to it, where the animal may be injured/hurt/maimed or killed due to lack of food or fights with other animals. Also, please remember that Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 is a Central Act, i.e. it is applicable throughout the country and the powers to enforce this law have been given to the Local Police.
  • Additionally, Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code also provides for imprisonment and fine, in cases involving animal cruelty. Section 429 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860, a Central Government Act, reads as follows:

“Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.– Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, of any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.”

Following are some of the self-explanatory documents that one can look up and refer to:

1. A 2 page circular issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances, and Training, on the aspect of street animal feeding and prohibits central government employees from harassing street dogs or those feeding/looking after them.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/public-grievances-circular-pg-1.jpg

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/public-grievances-circular-pg-2.jpg

2. The Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/the-animal-birth-control-dogs-rules-2001.pdf

3. A directive issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India, constituted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests- provides immunity to animal feeders and restricts RWAs from harassing people tending to dogs.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/awbi-direction.pdf

4. M.C.D. (Municipal Corporation of Delhi) notification, showing the approach of the M.C.D. with regard to street animals, which is based on the law of the land.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/mcd-notices-toi-march-2009.jpg

5. A Times of India news report regarding a Delhi High Court direction to the police to protect persons who feed stray dogs.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/times-of-india-article-on-feeding.pdf

6. A Hindustan Times news report regarding the view taken by the Supreme Court regarding stray dogs.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/ht-article-24th-jan-supreme-court-stays-bombay-high-court-order.jpg

7. An order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/addln-chief-metropolitan-magistrates-order-on-street-dogs-of-india.pdf

8. A Dossier of Indian Street Dog related laws and court rulings – https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/a-dossier-of-indian-street-dog-related-laws-and-court-rulings.pdf and Copies of other court judgments can be downloaded from http://www.strays.in/index.php/legal-precedence-faqs-judgements-court-cases-drafts/

9. Reporting a crime and lodging an F.I.R or Police Complaint-

https://jaagruti.org/2013/12/13/reporting-a-crime-all-about-lodging-an-f-i-r-with-the-police/

If you want awareness workshops held in your company or Institution on the subject of animal laws and welfare, for audience in any age-group, please write to us on contact@jaagruti.org

by

The law on pet owners in apartments

The Hindu published the following article on the laws pet owners have to keep animals in their houses

With apartment complexes becoming the norm, it becomes important for pet owners to understand their rights and responsibilities, for the welfare of their pets and their neighbours. Residents sometimes find a letter taped to the notice board (on behalf of the Apartment Association) that says that pets are banned and that owners must either vacate or abandon their pets.

“This is tantamount to harassment, and utterly unlawful,”says Anjali Sharma, Advocate, practising at the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court of India, who is an Executive Committee Member of, and Legal Advisor to the Animal Welfare Board of India. “Apartment owners’ associations and residents’ welfare associations cannot ‘legislate’. They cannot take it upon themselves to issue ‘edicts’ and restrict rights available to citizens. There is no law enacted by Parliament or any State Legislature that ‘bans’ companion animals. At best, municipalities and local authorities can regulate, or insist on registration or licensing of pets. These high handed circulars and letters suddenly taped to notice boards are therefore illegal. By pressurizing people to abandon their pets in this manner, they actually compel them to violate the law, since Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, declares the same as being an offence.”

She notes that consumer courts at Mumbai have at least on two occasions upheld the rights of residents faced with similar harassment, and observed that in the present times, pets are akin to children. Denying pet-owners the right to use elevators or common areas with their pets has been held to be deficiency in service on the part of these associations. She therefore urges pet-owners to stand by their companion animals in the face of such harassment, and refuse to ‘give them up’, or abandon them.

These rights, however, do come with duties. Pet-owners must earn the goodwill of neighbours by keeping their dogs on leash while in common areas and cleaning up after them if they soil the place. Sharma tells pet owners that being considerate is a must, and a basic courtesy. “Be reasonable”, is her simple, yet powerful advice to pet owners. “Exercise care. Ensure that their vaccinations are always up to date. And always walk your dog with a leash”. She signs off with the advice that being a responsible pet parent is important to ensure harmony in community living.

by

Gurgaon Municipal Corporation’s Directive to Presidents of Residential Welfare Societies to stop harassing people who have pets and tend to street dogs

Below are embedded image files/scans of a 3 page letter issued by Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon to Presidents of all RWAs in Gurgaon to stop harassing people who tend to street dogs and those who have pets (by passing unlawful dictats of banning pet dogs). Please use it to contest against your respective RWA’s who come out with weird aristocratic bye-laws on the same.

You can download all these pages combined together as  PDF File by clicking on the link below.

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012 (https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/gurgaon-municipal-corporation-directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012.pdf)

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012_Page 1

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-street-dogs_2012_Page 1

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012_Page 2

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-street-dogs_2012_Page 2

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012_Page 3

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-street-dogs_2012_Page 3

Suggested reading:

For all yours reference again, please click the link below to the Notice issued by a battery of lawyers to a Gurgaon based RWA that came out with an absurd ruling to ban people from having pets.

Legal notice issued to Kanchanjunga Coop.Group Housing Society at Gurgaon 

Also, please refer to this page on the website of Pet Parents Association.

by

Pets and Resident Welfare Associations (RWA): How does the law treat your pet?

Everyday, we receive many queries and calls over the Jaagruti helpline complaining about how their Residential Society’s Welfare Associations (commonly abbreviated as RWA’s) putting up notices ‘banning pets’, coming out with ‘no pets allowed’ clauses in their society bye-laws, ‘asking people to abandon their pets’, ‘mistreating street dogs’ etc. The article below by Rishi Dev of Citizens for Animal Rights, is a must-read for all those facing such a situation. This article explains as well as empowers you with information to fight your own respective battles in this regard for your sake and for your pet child..who has no one other than you in this world to fight for him/her or their rights.

Guest Post* by Rishi Dev, Citizens for Animal Rights

In 2010, the Central Mumbai Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum gave a strong directive to a group housing society who was charging a pet owner resident monthly fees for using lifts. The court clearly said – “Dogs are part of a family hence they have the right to use the lift just as any other member, and we cannot decide who is a family member and who isn’t, each family decides for itself.”

Before this in 2008 a similar order came from a lower court that clarified that pets are part of family and cannot be restricted from living or using the residential complexes.

In 2012, the Gurgaon Municipal Corporation was the first of their kind to issue strict notices to all CGHS and RWAs in Gurgaon, warning them not to formulate rules and regulations against pets and that any such move is in conflict with the law. The notices clearly stated – “Such a move may lead to dissolution of the RWA and prosecution of its office bearers, says the letter. It is illegal to remove animals from the area through security guards employed by RWAs. Nor can they intimidate residents who may be feeding those animals. Under stray dog management rules 2001, it’s illegal for an individual, RWA or estate management to remove or relocate dogs. The dogs have to be sterilized and vaccinated and returned to the same area. Vaccinated and sterilized dogs cannot be removed by the municipality too. Under Section 506 of the IPC, it’s a crime to threaten abuse or harass neighbors who feed animals.”

So what is origin of these laws protecting dogs and cats from humans who treat them unequal?

The system of law in Indian is a tiered system, based on Arthashastra from 400 B.C. & Manusmriti from 100 A.D. wherein the central philosophy was tolerance & pluralism. This is the reason the constitution declares India to be a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic, assuring its citizens justice, equality, and liberty.

The hierarchical system of Indian constitution thus forbids the lower hierarchies to overrule or override the higher orders, laws, directions or acts. This means that if Supreme Court says ‘yes’ to something, the ‘no’ by the high courts’ gets automatically nullified. This hierarchy comes down to the lowest local urban body or court. In India most courts have already ruled in favor of the animals in all respects. Hence any organization, individual or body ruling or following actions against such orders are automatically breaking the law and in contempt of the constitution and the honorable courts.

There are laws and constitutional provisions directly allowing people to take care of animals, whether inside or outside their places of work or living. The laws clearly protect people and their animals from all kinds of discrimination.  The Indian constitution states them very clearly via various sections. Article 48-A – “The State shall endeavor to protect & improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.” Article 51-A deals with the fundamental duties of the citizen.  Article 51-A(g) states – ” It shall be duty of every citizen of India to protect & improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.” Article 19 deals with the fundamental rights of the citizen. So “Right to Protect the Environment ” comes within Article 19. After the Stockholm Declaration in 1972 the Indian Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 inserted for the first time specific provisions to protect & improve the environment. I.P.C. Section 428 and 429 provides severe punishment to people resorting to dislocation, abduction and acts of cruelty towards community animals or pets. Ministry of Public Grievances notification and a similar notification by Animal Welfare Board of India dated March 2008, provide immunity to animal feeders and restrict government employees or bodies such as Resident Welfare Associations from harassing people who try to feed or help animals. Article 25, 26, 27, 28 provides religious freedom to all citizens and preserves the principle of secularism in India. According to the constitution, all religions are equal before the State. Citizens are free to preach, practice and propagate any religion of their choice in their own way. Keeping or feeding animals is a part of the same right. The other acts which protect animals are The  Environment (Protection)  Act – 1986 & Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972.

Hence, anyone taking care, keeping pets or street animals has natural immunity in the law. There are many orders pertaining to street animals by many courts. But in the recent times many RWAs have shown their autocracy over residents keeping pets. Keeping the same in mind the Animal Welfare Board of India and many municipal corporations have time and again written to the Registrar of Societies (ROS) and their RWAs to refrain from these undemocratic actions.

An RWA is a private, representative body which has no legal sanctity. It is just a group of people who have come together and formed a club. Their resolutions and bye laws are not legal mandates and especially if they violate the fundamental rights of a citizen or even more goes against an existing court order. Such RWAs can be legally prosecuted and if need be can face fines or imprisonment or both. Such precedence has been set before. If any resident faces such harassment from RWAs, must immediately approach the local magistrate and file a complaint of harassment and violation of their fundamental rights. The complaint must also be sent to ROS asking them to dissolve the RWA with immediate effect. AWBI must also be approached for taking appropriate legal action against such RWA members.

by

Do-it-Yourself (DIY) Series-4: A Dossier of Indian Street Dog related laws and court rulings- Read, Print and Share widely

To all those who feed and take care of their neighbourhood street dogs in India, we have one request. Don’t feel weak. The laws are on your side and also in favour of the street dogs you care for.

In this post, we are sharing with you one comprehensive document that compiles all the laws, news-clippings and court orders/rulings, pertaining to street dogs

Please download this document by clicking here: A Dossier of Indian Street Dog related laws and court rulings

Save it, take print-outs and read it well.

These are updated laws, rules, orders pertaining to DOGS, their feeding and other rights. Most dog lovers don’t bother to read them and end up getting harassed while the law is strong and clear. Please keep a copy ready and if possible submit one copy in your local police station and the RWA, so unfortunate encounters can be averted beforehand. 

A point wise synopsis is also written in the beginning of this document.

We thank Citizens for Animal Rights for their effort in compiling this document and sharing the same with us. By posting it here, we are sharing it further and hope you all will share it widely too and feel empowered.

Remember: Your responsibility however doesn’t end with just feeding them, please also ensure that these dogs you care for are sterilized and vaccinated…since you are friendly with them, can touch them, it is much easier for you to collaborate with the NGO run Animal Hospital (that runs the local Municipality supported ‘Animal Birth Control’ Programme for street dogs) near your home to help undertake the sterilization of these dogs, it is just a one time exercise and will prevent you the agony of seeing pups dying (of illnesses and car accidents) in front of your eyes ever so frequently.

by

Do-it-Yourself (DIY) Series-3: Apply for the ‘Colony Caretaker of Animals-Card’ from Animal Welfare Board of India

AWBI website screenshot-information to dogfeeders, colony caretakers

AWBI website screenshot-information to dogfeeders, colony caretakers

Animal Welfare Board of India has decided to issue Identity Cards to Street Dog Feeders/Colony Care Takers of Animals who are taking care of animals in their locality.

A proforma of registration form can be downloaded from this link- http://awbi.org/awbi-pdf/caretakers.pdf or please click below.

AWBI Form for getting Colony Caretaker of Animals ID Card

Please download the form and send the duly filled in form along with the following:

– Two passport size photographs.
– Self -attested true copy of the Ration Card/ Voter ID/ Driving License/ Passport/ PAN Card

 to

ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD OF INDIA
(Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India)
Post Box No. 8672, 13/1, Third Seaward Road, Valmiki Nagar,Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai – 600 041

Colony Animal Cretaker Form_AWBI_English

Colony Animal Cretaker Form_AWBI_Hindi

A news report on the same in Indian Express dated 21st January 2013, by Senior Correspondent Kamala Kelkar,  is posted below. Please hoever note that the process may take less or more than a couple of weeks for you to receive your cards, as mentioned below

People who care for street dogs will soon be getting government-issued identity cards. The new ID cards are expected to do away with harassment faced by many such persons from the general public, when they try to feed canines on the road.

In a move that animal activists termed “unprecedented,” the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) has decided last week that anyone who voluntarily cares for strays — dog feeders and colony caretakers who tend to animals in their locality.

It Board has put up a one-page registration form (can be downloaded free of cost) on its website awbi.org, for those who want to get these ID cards.

The applicant needs to fill in personal information such as name, address and experience. Once the application is submitted, the ID card would be processed and mailed to the applicant, board member and legal advisor Anjali Sharma said.

“The card would have the person’s name and an attestation that he/she is doing a right and lawful deed and the Animal Welfare Board supports it. This lends credibility to the person,” Sharma said.

The AWBI is a legal advisory body that was formed under the Animal Prevention Act of 1960 to protect the animals.

Sharma explained that the goal of the card, which does not provide any exclusive rights, was solely the welfare of animals and caretakers.

“Most people don’t realize that sterilization and vaccination of stray dogs would be possible only through feeding and befriending dogs,” Sharma said.

In December 2011, the Delhi High Court had passed an order voicing its approval for designated “dog feeding spots” for stray canines in the city. It passed the order on a petition which sought to protect dogs from “intimidating” residents, so they could be fed without any hassle.

The court also ruled that police should assist dog feeders if they faced any “harassment” from residents and also ordered the AWBI to designate specific feeding areas.

Rishi Dev, founder of Citizens for Animal Rights who has written a book on “Urban disputes over animals”, said this was the first time that the government was supporting such an initiative.

Sharma hoped that many would come forward to apply for the cards. “They are performing a duty,” she said. “And it’s a legitimate exercise.”

Do-it-Yourself (DIY) Series-2: Educating your Residential Society on the scientific and lawful manner of dealing with street dogs

This template letter on Google Docs is kind courtesy of the Voice of Stray Dogs, Bangalore and makes for a good resource material for those of you trying to educate their own residential societies (RWAs i.e. Resident Welfare Associations) on the best possible legally correct, scientific and humane way of dealing with the ‘subject’ of street dogs in their colonies.

How to do this yourself?

Firstly, read these two articles to best understand the Rights of Street Dogs in India and the Delhi High Court rulings on the subject of feeding street Dogs, then save the images and the PDF Files embedded in these articles on to your computer, take a print out of these saved files and attach it as annexures to the above letter that you would draft and address to the concerned person in your RWA, seal the letter and send it across through courier or registered post, keep a photocopy of the same set with you. Be strong and fight it out intelligently, the laws are on your side and the dogs, just use your wisdom and intellect to drive the point across to the ‘uninformed’.

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions on the above subject (kind courtesy of People for Animals):

Q) Can people who feed animals in their areas be stopped by the RWAs or Societies or neighbours under the law ?

A) Article 51A of the Constitutional Law of India, speaks about the duties of every citizen of India. One of these duties includes having compassion for living creatures. So the animal lover is protected under the Constitution.

Article 19 of the Constitution of India, deals with right to freedom and in this freedom comes the right to profession, occupation, trade and business. Therefore, it means that every citizen has the right to occupation and if someone has taken the caring of animals as his occupation, it is legal and he has every right to carry on with  his occupation.

Article 21 of the Constitution of India states the right to personal life and liberty. Now this is the very vast right. If someone wants to feed dogs and provides shelter to the dogs, he has every liberty to do so. He has this right to liberty that the law provides to every citizen of India.

But, above every law and rights, there is a natural right too, which is a universal right, that is inherent in the nature of ethics and contingent on human actions or beliefs. It is the right that is claimed to exist even when it is not enforced by the government or society as a whole. It is the right of the individual and considered beyond the authority of a government or international body to dismiss. Therefore, if there are any rights at all, there must be right to liberty, for all the others depend on this. And, loving, caring and feeding and giving shelter to dogs, definitely is a natural right of any individual.

In a judgment passed by the Delhi Court, it has been stated that the Animal Welfare Board of India and the Municipal authorities have in the guidelines issued by them specified the problem often faced by the individuals and families who adopts stray animals and feed them and come to the assistance of such persons. The court says, that it is necessary to bring into record that these individuals and families who adopt stray animals are doing a great service to the humanity as they are acting in the aid and assistance of municipal authorities by providing these animals with food and shelter and also by getting them vaccinated and sterilized. Without assistance of such persons no local municipal authority can successfully carry out its ABC programs. The court has went on to say that the local police and the municipal authorities are under the obligation not only to encourage such adoption but also to ensure that such persons who come forward to take care of these animals specifically the community or neighbourhood dogs so that they are not subjected to any kind of cruelty.

And finally, the court has said that every individual has a right to live his life in the manner he wants and it is necessary that the society and the community recognizes it.

Q) Can an RWA/Society or any individual pick up the dogs in a colony that are sterilized and vaccinated and throw them away somewhere

A) Under the Government of India Animal Birth Control rules 2001 , no sterilized dogs can be relocated  from their area. Under 5 High Court orders , sterilized dogs have to be in their original areas. Even if the dog is not sterilized , the Society can simply ask an animal welfare organization to sterilize and vaccinate the dog. They cannot relocate him. Relocation is not permissible as it would cause more problems such as increase of dog bites as dogs are territorial by nature and fight to retain their areas keeping out other dogs.
by

“Feeding stray dogs is not a crime”: Mumbai Court clears duo arrested, humiliated for feeding dogs

Today’s Mumbai  Mirror reports this heartening news, as reported by their correspondent Yogesh Sadhwani:

Court clears duo arrested, humiliated for feeding dogs

Sanjeev Dighe (pictured) and Yatin Mhatre were paraded around, ostensibly to show other residents what happened to people who fed strays (Courtesy Mumbai Mirror_2nd April 2012)

Two animal lovers from Thane, who were arrested and humiliated two years ago after a stray dog they used to feed allegedly bit a resident, have finally been acquitted, with a magistrate court ruling that feeding strays was not a crime.

The order provides welcome relief for animal lovers in the city, many of whom are pulled up by their housing societies for taking care of strays. Only recently, well-known director Partho Ghosh had a quarrel with his society management when he was fined Rs 1000 in his maintenance bill for feeding two stray dogs. His family, incidentally, had been taking care of them since they were pups.

This order is only the first victory for Sanjeev Dighe and Yatin Mhatre, who are fighting a separate case in High Court against the State and the police for handcuffing them and parading them around their society. In this, they are being represented by Mahesh Jethmalani and have the backing of, among others, Maneka Gandhi.

For Dighe, a commercial artist, and Mhatre – both residents of Lok Puram complex in Thane – the nightmare started on September 20, 2009. The duo had been feeding strays in their locality for several years, something that had led to many altercations with society members. Dighe says the residents believed this would lead to an increase in the stray dog population in the area.

That night, Dighe was getting ready to go out and feed the strays around 10.45 pm when a posse of cops arrived in a private vehicle and asked him to accompany them to Vartak Nagar Police Station. Mhatre accompanied him there, and a few hours later, the duo were booked under Section 289 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with animals in a particular person’s care attacking someone.

The next morning, both were handcuffed and taken to their society, where they were paraded around, ostensibly to show other residents what happened to people who fed strays. They were then taken to a holiday court, which released them on bail.

In a recent order, Jaishree Poonawala, judicial magistrate first class, remarked that “feeding stray dogs is not a crime”, adding that strays were not the same as pets and certainly not the sole responsibility of those who feed them.

“After our arrest, Maneka Gandhi personally got involved and helped us file the petition in HC through Mahesh Jethmalani,” said Dighe.

This order itself has come as a huge relief to Mhatre and Dighe. “Finally justice has prevailed. Several people like me are often victimised by residents who do not like others feeding strays. We hope this order will help others like us,” said Dighe.

Ajay Marathe, a noted animal rights activist, pointed out that incidents of animal lovers being victimised were common in Mumbai. “Those who feed dogs in their area are treated badly. Most residents are against such feeding and come up with random rules to stop them,” said Marathe.

RK Joshi, convener of Committee to Monitor Animal Welfare Laws in Maharashtra, has recently written to the BMC commissioner highlighting the issue of societies trying to get rid of stray dogs.

He has pointed out that years after Bombay High Court laid down the guidelines for dealing with stray dogs – the HC has put an emphasis on animal birth control and sterilisation – people continued to harass dogs and animal lovers.

“There is growing tendency in housing societies not to permit stray dogs on the society premises or even in the vicinity. There have been instances when dogs are brutally assaulted by the society members or the watchmen,” the letter states, adding that instances of animal lovers being assaulted were common.

The letter urges the commissioner, who is also the chairman of the Monitoring Committee, to urgently look at these issues and ensure that animal lovers and dogs were not harassed.

~~

Ms. Anjali Sharma, Advocate and Legal Advisor to the Animal Welfare Board of India, says that what is extremely significant is this part: “In a recent order, Jaishree Poonawala, judicial magistrate first class, remarked that “feeding stray dogs is not a crime”, adding that strays were not the same as pets and certainly not the sole responsibility of those who feed them.”

This is, as Ms. Sharma explains, because these men had been arrested under Section 289 of the Indian Penal Code – ‘negligent conduct with respect to an animal’, after a stray they were feeding bit a resident of the locality. Section 289 applies to pet dogs, but there has been an increasing attempt on the part of many, including police, R.W.A.s, etc. to bring feeding of strays, and any aggression the strays may show if provoked, within the ambit of this Section.

by

In defense of the street dogs of Kashmir

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/jkmassculling/
 
Dr. Asgar Samoon, Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, had issued orders in March 2011 to kill all street dogs of Kashmir.

A qualified veterinarian, he has admitted to the Animal Welfare Board  of India, to requesting the ‘public’ to identify rabid dogs !

He obviously hasn’t let his veterinary knowledge come in his way. Carnage is reported to be occurring in Kashmir everywhere. Dogs are being poisoned and killed brutally in the name of rabies which is nowhere to be found or identified.
Mass graves are being dug and dogs being dumped into that. Any neighbour who has a grudge against another with a pet has now the licence to kill that pet dog.

Animal activists have demanded suspension of the Divisional Commissioner and appealed to the Veterinary Council of India to revoke his licence as he is not fit to be a vet. If you support this, please write to:
 
VETERINARY COUNCIL OF INDIA
A statutory body of Government of India established
under the Indian Veterinary Council Act 1984.
A-Wing, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110066
Phone: 011-26184149, 26184354 Fax: 011-26182434
Email vciinfo@vhub.nic.in
 
 
AWBI has also send notice to Dr. Samoon which is attached here.

Below are presented a series of articles that explan why Kashmir needs its street dogs…in a state which has been marred by violence, bloodshed and terrorism all these years, this state provoked bloodshed of innocent animals will only bring in more misery to the state. Read on..

Article in Greater Kashmir

Srinagar needs its street dogs. Here’s why …

Other opinion by Lisa Warden

Do you consider street dogs to be a barking, snarling, stinking menace? Do you wish they would all just get hauled off somewhere and be made to disappear? Perhaps you’re even one of the many people who support the poisoning of dogs. If so, then you are doing yourself and your family a distinct disservice. This is why:

People still die every year in India from rabies, the majority of those due to bites from infected dogs. Death from rabies is completely preventable; it’s a disease that has been eradicated in many parts of the world. Ironically, the best defense against rabies is not the absence of dogs, but their presence – the presence of vaccinated dogs, that is. Dogs that have been vaccinated against rabies actually serve to protect the human inhabitants of their neighborhoods from the disease.

How? Simple. Dogs are territorial creatures. They do not allow new dogs to migrate into their areas. If, in addition to anti-rabies vaccination, the dogs have been sterilized, they will not reproduce, and the dog population in your area will decrease naturally over time. The average life expectancy of a dog in urban India is only 3.4 years.

 The killing of dogs does not work as a population control policy. It has never worked anywhere in the world that it has been undertaken, even when the numbers of dogs killed are in the tens of thousands. This is because dogs are so fertile that they simply repopulate the existing habitat in the subsequent breeding season.

 Furthermore, in cities like Srinagar, where public sanitation is still a work in progress and there is ample garbage lying around, dogs perform an essential service, that of waste processing. Garbage is habitat. If there are no dogs in a place with lots of uncollected waste, nature will fill the vacuum with some other scavenger, inevitably one that is more problematic in its relationship to humans. Take what happened in Surat in 1994. The municipal authority made the decision to kill thousands of dogs. Cause led to effect: the rat population, all of a sudden blessed with a massive increase in available food (garbage), and thousands fewer predators (dogs), exploded. Bubonic plague eventually arrived on the scene, and hundreds of people were infected. Fifty-seven people died.

Are dogs ever a menace? Yes, and those that engage in bonafide, unprovoked, biting attacks on humans need to be removed from the population. This needs to be done by qualified animal welfare workers. However, the two most significant factors that result in dog bites – migration and mating – are actually exacerbated by killing or removing dogs, and failing miserably at the sterilization project.

Let me reiterate, if Kashmiris are serious about addressing the “dog menace” in their cities, killing dogs categorically will not work. This has been proven time and again the world over. The only solution that has been scientifically proven to eradicate rabies and decrease the street dog population has been large-scale sterilization and anti-rabies vaccination. Further, it is essential to the success of any intervention that the dogs be put back in their original locations following sterilization and anti-rabies vaccination.

 Whether you love dogs or hate them, it is in your best interests to let your neighborhood dogs live in peace exactly where they are. You just need to ensure your municipal authority does its duty by sterilizing and vaccinating those dogs. Things will not get better until 75 per cent of the street dog population of Srinagar has been sterilized, vaccinated against rabies and left in peace, and until the municipal authority implements proper waste management reform.

 (The author Lisa Warden is founder and director of DOGSTOP, a non-profit advisory group dedicated to rabies eradication and street dog population management in India. She also serves as advisor to ABC India, a pan-Indian organization devoted to the control of street dog populations throughout the country via large-scale sterilization and anti-rabies vaccination.)

Article in The Pioneer

Mass killing of loC that guard Kashmir

By Hiranmay Karlekar

The slaughter of street dogs in the Kashmir Valley calls for a full inquiry. The hapless animals served as watchdogs for the Army against infiltrators crossing the LoC and alerted security forces whenever danger was afoot.

The reported mass killing of stray dogs in Srinagar merits a serious probe. On September 22, 2009, a report in The Times of India by Ajay Sura had stated that stray dogs had become watchdogs for the Army against infiltrators crossing the Line of Control in Jammu & Kashmir. The report quoted Lt-Col NK Airy, spokesperson for the Army’s Tenth Division, as saying that these dogs recognised troops and local civilians and started barking whenever there was any movement of strangers. They were quick to train, easy to maintain, did not take a huge amount to procure and could not be recognised by the infiltrators as Army dogs.

Many Army officers have testified to the invaluable role of such dogs. One of them is Mr Habib Rehman, who began life in the Army and retired as the head of a well-known hotel chain. In his touching book, A Home for Gori, about a dog who adopted his family and became a deeply-loved member, he narrates how his love for dogs was awakened by his acquaintance with Bullet, which he made as a Second-Lieutenant posted in what is now Arunachal Pradesh. Every Army picket from the LoC in the north-west to Arunachal Pradesh in the north-east, had a dog like Bullet, a mongrel of Bhutia origin of the kind found all along the Himalayan ranges, as an additional member, rendering signal service in alerting it to an enemy’s approach and any other threats. A deep bond invariably develops between such canines and Army personnel.

In an article entitled The dog that did India proud in The Pioneer of March 24, 2007, Major-General Ashok Mehta (Retd) wrote fondly about Krupa, a Bakerwal puppy, who was picked up in 1963 and lovingly reared by a unit of the Gorkha Rifles serving along the LoC, then called the Ceasefire Line. Krupa did yeoman service not only with it but also the Sikh and Garhwal regiments that followed

Law enforcing authorities everywhere have acknowledged the important role played by stray dogs. As Director-General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Mr Swaranjit Sen had advised police stations to adopt stray dogs for being alerted against approaching Maoists. Not surprisingly, Maoists in West Bengal had asked villagers to kill all village dogs. Even earlier, terrorists coming across the Line of Control had asked villagers close to it to kill their dogs; so had terrorists in Punjab.

The point in mentioning all this is the recent report in several newspapers of Sajjad Afghani, an important leader of Jaish-e-Mohammad, being killed along with this bodyguard, Omar Bilal, by the Jammu & Kashmir Police in an encounter on March 10. The reports quoted Mr RM Sahai, Inspector-General of Police, Kashmir, as saying that they were trying to set up a base in Srinagar “to carry out big strikes in the future on security force installations”. Was the killing of stray dogs meant to facilitate the strikes? The matter needs to be investigated because of the State Government’s shocking delay in entering into a partnership with the Animal Welfare Board of India in implementing the canine Animal Birth Control programme, the only effective means of controlling stray dog populations.

Terrorists have reason to oppose the programme which involves the neutering and vaccination (against rabies) of stray dogs and their return to where they had been picked up from. Implemented area-wise, it is calculated to taper off a city or State’s stray dog population as the neutered and vaccinated dogs live out their life-spans. This means that they will continue to remain in their areas for some years and continue to alert security forces to the approach of terrorists who, one hopes, would be routed by the time the dogs live out their biological life-spans.

On the other hand, as the Guidelines for Dog Population Management, jointly released by the World Health Organisation and the World Society for the Protection of Animals in 1990, killing never succeeds in providing a solution. What it can do, however, is a temporary reduction of stray dog populations in specific areas and thus help terrorist strikes. Is this the reason why some in Jammu & Kashmir oppose the implementation of the ABC programme and favour killing? If so, who are they? One needs to find out.

Article in The Pioneer

Stray dogs alert terrorists’ approach

By Hiranmay Karlekar

As several authorities cite that stray dogs warn of approaching terrorists, there is every possibility that terrorists are orchestrating not only a mass hysteria against stray dogs in Kashmir but also the demand for their killing

A report in Greater Kashmir of April 21, 2011, states, “The police top brass (on) Wednesday dispelled the notion given by some media agencies that the elimination of stray dogs would facilitate a rise in militancy”. The report did not mention the name of the agencies but carried quotes from my column in The Pioneer of 17 March on the mass killing of stray dogs in Srinagar, which clearly indicated that the reference was to the latter. The report further quoted a Deputy Inspector General of Jammu & Kashmir Police as saying that there was no relationship between stray dog populations and militancy, which were altogether different issues. It quoted the DIG, who described “dog menace” as a big issue”, as saying that it was for bodies like the Srinagar Municipal Corporation to “get rid of the problem.” The police was ready to help them in whatever way they wanted.

I will begin with reference to my column. The part of it which referred to terrorism in Kashmir, mentioned among other things, media accounts of the death of a JeM militant and his driver in an encounter with the police on March 10, and added, “The reports quoted Mr RM Sahai, Inspector General of Police, Kashmir, as saying that they were trying to set up a base in Srinagar ‘to carry out big strikes in the future on security force installations.’ Was the killing of stray dogs meant to facilitate the strikes?” Clearly, I was referring to efforts to set up bases to carry out big strikes and not, repeat not, increasing militancy. The two are entirely different things.

A terrorist strike is a single act. It is a part of militancy, which is a complex and wider phenomenon. At one level, militancy is the state of mind which is a blend of alienation, anger and aggression, prone to explode in violence. Since violence is an expression of militancy, the latter at the social context connotes a situation created by violence and the aggression associated with militancy. An increase in militancy means a rise in the incidence of militancy-related violence and the number of militants, as well as the spread and intensification of the aggressive mindset associated with militancy.

A single terrorist strike — or several strikes — however severe, need not indicate increasing militancy if more strikes do not follow. It is easier to organise a single or a couple of terrorist strikes than sustaining an increase in the level of militancy which requires the establishment of an infrastructure for procuring funds, arms, ammunition, explosives and the provision of electronic communication facilities through emails, phones and so on. It also requires propaganda for the militants’ cause, recruitment, training and indoctrination of terrorists and the organisation of shelters, false travel and identification documents, and storage of arms, explosives and so on. Nine-eleven in the United States and 7/11 (attacks on London’ underground subway system) in 2005 sent shockwaves throughout the world but did not lead to rising level of militancy in America and Britain.

Surprise is critical to the success of terrorist strikes. It can be neutralised by an efficient intelligence set-up which collects advance information and pre-empts terror strikes and destroys terrorists’ infrastructure. Equally, a strike can be neutralised if an alert is sounded as terrorists approach their target, enabling the security forces to repulse them. As several authorities cited in my column aver, stray dogs sound precisely such an alert. There is, therefore, every possibility that terrorists are orchestrating not only a mass hysteria against stray dogs in Kashmir but also the demand for their killing.

It is possible that the reporter, who did not understand what I had written, had also failed to understand what the DIG had said. If, however, the latter did say what he reportedly has, then he has betrayed a very narrow and conventional approach to counter-terrorism which ignores the complex and mutli-dimensional nature of the challenge. Referring to terrorism in India, Maj-Gen (Retd) Afsir Karim writes in his contribution entitled “Terrorism: the Indian Experience”, in Confronting Terrorism edited by Mr Maroof Raza, “The challenges of internal destabilisation, subversion, creation of administrative and economic chaos, and engineering divisions among diverse socio-political and ethnic groups cannot be met by conventional responses.” No further comments.

by

Priya, Dog breeding and the Income Tax Department

On a visit to an animal shelter a few weeks back, we met Priya, a female great Dane who was found abandoned on the road side by an animal ambulance. She was suffering from a tumour- a seemingly malignant one. Looking at her condition, it was quite evident that she was chucked out by a Dog breeder when she was no longer ‘a machine’ of use to him in his ‘puppy farm/factory’, i.e. ‘factories run by greedy humans in which female pedigreed dogs are repeatedly mated and bred so that they could give birth to puppies that can be sold at handsome rates’ and fill in the coffers of these ‘dog breeders’!

Photo copyright: 'Jaagruti'
Priya, a Female Great Dane abandoned by a Dog breeder to die on the streets- Her eyes say it all! Photo Copyright – ‘Jaagruti’ 

So, when dogs like Priya are no longer able to produce babies or turn sick beyond cure, these people who had over the years exploited her to give birth to pups repeatedly find her a burden and cose thereby to dump her on the roadside!

For a peep into the horrendous puppy mill trade, please look at the video below.

So, Next time you wish to adopt a dog, adopt for an Indian dog on the street or adopt one from a nearby shelter. Please do not buy a puppy ever because demands create supplies!

Remember ADOPT, Dont BUY!

Dog breeding in India is an unregulated business in alomost every city, a business that brings in huge profits to those who do it, be it big breeders carying this out in their farms, dog trainers who carry it out on their roofs atop their shanty quarters in areas like Dwarka Mod, Palam and across many such habitations in Delhi or even those who carry it out in their houses next doors to yours by repeatedly getting their pet dogs to mate and breed.

That is why news items like the ones below come as a breath of hope!

Income Tax Department issues directive to keep tabs on all breeders who sell newborn puppies for huge profit (Source: Mid Day, 23rd March 2011)

The Rs 500-crore pet dog business has come under the scanner of the Income Tax department.

The I-T department headquarters, New Delhi, has issued fresh directives to all its regional offices to keep tabs on all dog breeders who sell newborn puppies for huge profits.

All pet shops and known dog breeders are now under the surveillance of sleuths.

A senior I-T officer said, “Most canines of good lineage are sold at exorbitant prices and without any receipts. Some of the deals even run into crores.”

According to the I-T directive (copy available with MiD DAY), it has been noticed in recent years that pet shops have spread rampantly across the major cities.

These shops are technically licensed to sell animal food and accessories, but they also deal in canines and exotic birds to make a quick buck.

The order stated that it is suspected that a majority of these transactions are outside the tax net, so appropriate action should be taken against them.

Senior I-T officials, including Chief Commissioner P P Shrivastava, however, are tight-lipped about the directive and how they plan to crack down on the tax evaders.
 
According to I-T sources, the demand for exotic dogs increased after a cellular company used a pug in its advertisements.

According to sources, a 45-day-old pug is priced at more than Rs 40,000 in the open market.

Pet dealers at Crawford Market told MiD DAY that a Cocker Spaniel puppy is priced around Rs 7,000.
 
“Pet dealers are not sensitive to the health of the animals as they are more concerned about making money. Breeding is done regularly. This should be banned,” said Dr J C Khanna, member, Animal Welfare Board of India.

500 breeders

According to a modest estimate, there are more than 500 commercial dog breeders in Mumbai, Thane and Vasai. There are an estimated 7,000 such breeders across the country.

Dog breeding is a flourishing business in New Delhi, Chandigarh, Gurgaon, Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh and Chennai as well. The turnover is estimated to be around Rs 500 crore.

The volume of the business can be gauged from the fact that even a fake certificate to prove the breed of canine fetches between Rs 2,000 and Rs 3,000 on the streets of Mumbai. 

But, all dog breeders are not tax evaders. Mayur Shinde, owner of Shinde Kennel, Pune, said, “Dog breeding and selling is my full-time business. I give genuine receipts and also pay income tax regularly.”

Procedure to buy a puppy
Before buying a puppy, it is necessary to get a licence from the respective municipality. BMC charges only
Rs 100 as fees and Rs 200 for vaccine per year. The seller should be registered with the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI).

by

Animal Abuse-from F.I.R to Jail

We at Jaagruti had attended the ‘India for Animals’ 2011 conference held at Chennai from 29-31 January 2011, with the objective of sharing our learnings from the conference with the readers of this website as well as the many people who keep searching the internet for information on such topics and often end up being disappointed with the paucity of easily understandable information available online on subjects of animal welfare and laws for the common man who cares for animals on the street and empathizes with the suffering of animals. The information presented below will be useful for reporting cases and lodging F.I.Rs with police on issues other than animal abuse as well.

Mr. Ajay Marathe, an RTI Activist from Mumbai shares this important brochure titled, “First Information Report (F.I.R) and YOU’ prepared by the Commonwealth Human Rights initiative which provides answers to all the questions related to F.I.R’s that may cross our mind often. You can download this brochure by clicking here.

Below is a handout shared by Ms. Anjali Sharma (Advocate, Legal advisor and board member, Animal Welfare Board of India) and Inspector Ajaib Singh of Punjab Police in the workshop they had held on Day 2 of this conference titled, “Animal Abuse-F.I.R se Jail tak‘

WHAT IS AN FIR, AND WHO CAN LODGE AN FIR?

First Information Repot (FIR) is a written document prepared by the police when they receive information about the commission of cognizable offence.  It is generally a complaint lodged with the police by the victim of a cognizable offence, or by someone on his/her behalf.  Any one who knows about the commission of a cognizable offence, including a police officer who comes to know about the same, can lodge an FIR.

WHAT IS A COGNIZABLE OFFENCE?

A cognizable offence is one for which the police are authorized to start investigation on their own, and do not require any order from the court to do so. They are authorized to arrest without warrant.

WHAT IS A NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCE?

A non-cognizable offence is an offence in which a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant.  The police cannot investigate such an offence without the court’s permission.

THE POLICE MAY NOT INVESTIGATE A COMPLAINT AND REGISTER FIR IF:-

(i)              The case, in the opinion of the officer in charge of a police station, is not of serious nature;

(ii)            The police feel that there is not enough ground to investigate.

However, the police must record reasons for not conducting an investigation, and in the latter case, must also inform the complainant.

HOW SHOULD YOU GO ABOUT LODGING AN FIR?

i)                Inform the officer in charge of the concerned police station, either orally, or in writing, regarding the commission of the offence ;

ii)              When information about the commission of a cognizable offence is given orally, the police must write it down ;

iii)            It is your right as the person giving information regarding the commission of an offence to demand that the information recorded by the police be read over to you.

iv)             You should sign the report only after verifying that the information recorded by the police is as per the details given by you.

v)               Always ask for a copy of the FIR, since it your right to get it free of cost.

WHAT SHOULD YOU MENTION IN YOUR COMPLAINT THAT YOU WANT REGISTERED AS AN FIR?

  • Your name and address;
  • Date, and time and the location at which the incident that you wish to report about, occurred;
  • An accurate description of the incident that you wish to report;
  • Names and descriptions of the persons involved in the incident.

WHAT CAN YOU DO IF YOUR FIR IS NOT REGISTERED?

  • You can meet the Superintendent of Police or other higher officers like Deputy Inspector General of Police or Inspector General of Police, and bring your complaint to their notice.
  • You can send your complaint in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police concerned.  If the Superintendent of Police is satisfied with your complaint, he shall either investigate the case himself or order an investigation to be made.
  • You can file a private complaint before the court having jurisdiction.

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

THE POLICE ACT, 1861

An Act for the Regulation of Police

Preamble: – WHEREAS it is expedient to re-organise the police and to make it a more efficient instrument for the prevention and detection of crime; It is enacted as follows: –

——–

34. Punishment for certain offences on roads, etc:- Powers of police officers.-

Any person who, on any road or in any 2[open place or] street or thoroughfare within the limits of any town to which this section shall be specially extended by the State-Government, commits any of the following offences, to the obstruction, inconvenience, annoyance, risk, danger of damage of the 3[ residents or passengers] shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty rupees, or to imprisonment 4[with or without hard labour] not exceeding eight days; and it shall be lawful for any police officer to take into custody; without a warrant, any person who, within his view, commitsany of such offences namely :-

First-Slaughtering cattle, Curious riding, etc:- Any person who slaughters any cattle or cleans any carcass; any person who rides or drives any cattle recklessly or furiously, or trains or breaks any horse or other cattle;

Second-Cruelty to animal:- Any person who wantonly or cruelly beats, abuses or tortures any animal; .

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

THE DELHI POLICE ACT, 1978

An Act to amend and consolidate the law relating to the regulation of the police in the Union territory of Delhi.

It is to be noted that the Delhi Police act has a special chapter, i.e Chapter 9 devoted to empowering officials of Delhi Police with special powers over and above those mentioned in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 to enforce this act further

——–

CHAPTER IX (DELHI POLICE ACT): Special Powers under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960

73. Powers with regard to offences under Act 59 or 1960. (1) When in respect of an animal an offence punishable under sub-section (1) of Sec. 11 or Sec. 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 has been committed, when there is a reasonable ground for suspecting that such offence has been committed, a police officer may-

(a) take the animal to the Metropolitan Magistrate, or

(b) if the accused person so requires, take the animal to a veterinary officer specified by general or special order by the Administrator in this behalf:

Provided that the police officer may, instead of taking the animal to a veterinary officer, take the animal for detention in a dispensary, or in any suitable place approved by the Administrator by general or special order and the animal shall thereupon be detained there until its production before a Metropolitan Magistrate, or

(c) take the animal to an infirmary appointed under Sec. 35 of the said Act for treatment and detention thereto, pending direction of a Magistrate under sub-section (2) of that section, or

(d) when the animal is in such physical condition that it cannot be taken to a veterinary officer or a Metropolitan Magistrate, draw up a report of the condition of the animal in the presence of two or more respectable persons describing such wound, sores, fractures, bruises, or other marks of injury as may be found on the body of the animal:

Provided that the police officer may take the animal for detention in a dispensary or any suitable place approved by the Administrator by general or special order and the animal shall thereupon be detained there until its produce before a Metropolitan Magistrate.

(2) Where an animal is detained in a dispensary, infirmary or other place under sub-section (1), the animal shall be produced before a Metropolitan magistrate with the least possible delay and in any case within a period not exceeding three days from the date on which it was so detained.

——–

77. Power of police officer to unsaddle animal or to unload it. When a police officer in good faith suspects that any animal being employed, in any work or labour is, by reason of any sore, unfit to be so employed, he may require the  person  in  charge  of  such  animal  to

unsaddle or unload it for the purpose of ascertaining whether any sore exists and. if any person refuses to do so, such police officer may himself unsaddle or unload the animal or may cause the same to be unsaddled or unloaded.

78. Arrest without warrant in case of certain offences under Act 59 of 1960. Any police officer may arrest, without a warrant from a Magistrate, any person committing in his presence any offence punishable under clauses (a) to (m) (both inclusive) of sub-section (1) of Sec. 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

MADRAS CITY POLICE ACT, 1888

An Act to regulate the Police of the City of Madras.

——–

Section 24 – Police Officers and Agent of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals may arrest without warrant in view of offence

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other Law for the time being in force :-

(a) any offence made punishable by Sections 45, 46, 49-A, 72 or 75 shall be cognizable.

(b) any Police Officer may arrest without a warrant any person committing in his view any offence made punishable by this Act.

(2) Any agent of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals who is specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf may arrest without a warrant any person committing in his view any offence punishable under Section 53.

(3) The agent shall have power to release any person so arrested on his executing a bond with or without sureties, for his appearance before a Magistrate if and when required.

——–

Section 53 – Penalty for cruelty to animals

Whoever cruelly beats, ill-treats or tortures any animal, or causes any animal to be cruelly beaten, ill-treated or tortured, shall be liable on conviction to fine not exceeding one hundred rupees or to imprisonment, not exceeding three months, or to both.

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

 

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

——–

Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees.

428. Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees.-Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless any animals or animal of the value of the ten rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Classification of Offence:- The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable, compoundable and triable by any Magistrate.

Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.

429. Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.–Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, of any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.

Classification of Offence:- The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable, compoundable and triable by Magistrate of the first class.

——–

Negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substance.

284. Negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substance.–

Whoever does, with any poisonous substance, any act in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any person, or knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any poisonous substance in his possession as is sufficient to guard against probable danger to human life from such poisonous substance, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

Classification of Offence:- The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable, triable by any Magistrate, and non-compoundable.

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT, 1960

Section 11. Treating animals cruelly : (1) If any person

(a) beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering or causes, or being the owner permits, any animal to be so treated; or

(b) 13(employs in any work or labour or for any purpose any animal which, by reason of its age or any disease) infirmity; wound, sore or other cause, is unfit to be so employed or, being the owner, permits any such unfit animal to be employed; or

(c) wilfully and unreasonably administers any injurious drug or injurious substance to 14(any animal) or wilfully and unreasonably causes or attempts tocause any such drug or substance to be taken by 15(any animal;) or

(d) conveys or carries, whether in or upon any vehicle or not, any animal in such a manner or position as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering; or

(e) keeps or confines any animal in any -cage or other receptacle which does not measure sufficiently in height, length and breadth to permit the animal a reasonable opportunity for movement; or

(f) keeps for an unreasonable time any animal chained or tethered upon an unreasonably short or unreasonably heavy chain or cord; or

(g) being the owner, neglects to exercise or cause to be exercised reasonably any dog habitually chained up or kept in close confinement; or

(h) being the owner of (any animal) fails to provide such animal with sufficient food, drink or shelter; or

(i) without reasonable cause, abandons any animal in circumstances which tender it likely that it will suffer pain by reason of starvation thirst; or

(j) wilfully permits any animal, of which he is the owner, to go at large in any street, while the animal is affected with contagious or infectious disease or, without reasonable excuse permits any diseased or disabled animal, of which he is the owner, to die in any street; or

(k) offers for sale or without reasonable cause, has in his possession any animal which is suffering pain by reason of mutilation, starvation, thirst, overcrowding or other illtreatment; or

(1) mutilates any animal or kills any animal (including stray dogs) by using the method of strychnine injections, in the heart or in any other unnecessarily cruel manner or;

(m) solely with a view to providing entertainment

(i) confines or causes to be confined any animal (including tying of an animal as a bait in a tiger or other sanctuary) so as to make it an object or prey for any other animal; or

(n) organises, keeps uses or acts in the management or, any place for animal fighting or for the purpose of baiting any animal or permits or offers any place to be so used or receives money for the admission of any other person to any place kept or used for any such purposes; or

(o) promotes or takes part in any shooting match or competition wherein animals are released from captivity for the purpose of such shooting:

he shall be punishable 19(in the case of a first offence, with fine which shall not be less than ten rupees but which may extend to fifty rupees and in the case of a second or subsequent offence committed within three years of the previous offence, with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees but which may extend, to one hundred rupees or with imprisonment for a term which may extend, to three months, or with both.

(2) For the purposes of section (1) an owner shall be deemed to have committed an offence if he has failed to exercise reasonable care and supervision with a view to the prevention of such offence;

Provided that where an owner is convicted permitting cruelty by reason only of having failed to exercise such care and supervision, he shall not be liable to imprisonment without the option of a fine.

(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to –

(a) the dehorning of cattle, or the castration or branding or nose roping of any animal in the prescribed manner, or

(b) the destruction of stray dogs in lethal chambers by such other methods as may be prescribed, or (Note from ‘Jaagruti’: nothing is prescribed on this front under any laws or directives, humane sterilization of dogs is the only method advocated to control dog population and euthanasia can be administered to terminally ill and incurable animals only)

(c) the extermination or destruction of any animal under the authority of any law for the time being in force; or

(d) any matter dealt with in Chapter IV; or

(e) the commission or omission of any act in the course of the destruction or the preparation for destruction of any animal as food for mankind unless such destruction or preparation was accompanied by the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering.

12. Penalty for practising phooka or doom dev : If any persons upon any cow or other milch animal the operation called practising phooka or doom dev or any other operation (including injection of any or doom dev. substance) to improve lactation which is injurious to the health of the animal or permits such operation being performed upon any such animal in his possession or under his control, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with both, and the animal on which the operation was performed shall be forfeited to the Government.

——–

28. Saving as respects manner of killing prescribed by religion : Nothing contained in this Act shall render it an offence to kill any animal in a manner required by the religion of any community.

——–

38. Power to make rules. –

——–

(3) If any person contravenes, or abets the contravention of, any rules made under this section, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with both.

 

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

TRANSPORT OF ANIMALS, RULES, 1978

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (h) of sub-section (2) of Section 38 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (59 of 1960); the Central Government hereby makes the following rules, the same having been previously published as required by the said Section, namely :

——–

 

2. Definitions : In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires–

(a)       qualified veterinary surgeon means one who holds a diploma or a degree of a recognized veterinary college.

——–

96. Issue of certificate before transportation –

(1) A valid certificate issued by an officer or any person or Animal Welfare Organisation duly recognised and authorised for this purpose by the Animal Welfare Board of India or the Central Government shall be procured by any person making transport of any animal before transportation of such animal verifying that all the relevant Central and State Acts, rules and orders pertaining to the said animals including the rules relating to transport of such animals have been duly complied with and that the animal is not being transported for any purpose contrary to the provision of any law.

(2) In the absence of such certificate, the carrier shall refuse to accept the consignment for transport.

97. Cancellation of permit or authorisation for transport –

(1) In the event of contravention or non compliance of any of the rules contained in these rule for transport of animals, if it is pointed out in writing by any officer or persons or Animal Welfare Organisations authorised for this purpose by the Animal Welfare Board of India or the Central Government, then, any permit or authorisation issued for such transport shall be immediately cancelled by the concerned authority and it shall be the duty of the police to stop the further transport even from the intermediary station and proceed against the said offenders and deal with the animals in accordance with law.

(2) The custody of the animals immediately after unloading from the rail wagons, truck or any other vehicle shall be given to the authorised Animal Welfare Organisation if available, till the competent authority or the magistrate having jurisdiction decides about their care and upkeep.

98. General conditions of transport –

(1) Animals to be transported shall be healthy and in good condition and such animals shall be examined by a veterinary doctor for freedom from infectious diseases and their fitness to undertake the journey; provided that the nature and duration of the proposed journey shall be taken into account while deciding upon the degree of fitness.

(2) An animal which is unfit for transport shall not be transported and the animals who are new born, diseased, blind emaciated, lame, fatigued or having given birth during the preceding seventy two hours or likely to give birth during transport shall not be transported.

(3) Pregnant and very young animals shall not be mixed with other animals during transport.

(4) Different classes of animals shall be kept separately during transport.

(5) Diseased animals, whenever transported for treatment, shall not be mixed with other animals

(6) Troublesome animals shall be given tranquilisers before loading during transport.

(7) Animals shall be transported in their on-farm social groups (established atleast one week prior to journey).

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

More articles on this subject and Animal laws of India can be accessed under the following category of posts on Jaagruti


by

What does it take to rescue an animal? – A poem by Bhavani Sundaram

This poem is the first in the series of many poems penned down and shared with us by Ms. Bhavani Sundaram to inspire you in sustaining your efforts to rescue an animal in distress…

A heart of gold to accept all animals in whatever state they come in

A heart of steel to be able to say no when there just isn’t room for one more dog

Knowing that you cannot save them all

Patience with breeders who don’t seem to care, won’t help saying it’s not their problem

Patience with those dogs that may never get adopted

A smiling face as it’s the only way to hide the agony, pain in one’s heart

A team effort where everyone contributes and works as for for one goal

Willingness & Openness to work for animals

Last but not the least a compassionate, loving heart….

by

The ABC of stray dogs

Animal Birth Control: Its as easy as ABC (Image Courtesy PETA)

Animal Birth Control/ABC Programm involves sterilizing street dogs, vaccinating them against rabies and releasing them back into the areas where they were picked up from.

The article below is kind courtesy of  The Pioneer Newspaper, penned by noted senior journalist Mr. Hiranmay Karlekar who is also the author of a book titled ‘Savage Humans and Stray Dogs’, the article sheds light on the ‘ABC’ of Delhi’s Animal Birth Control/ABC Programme, comes in the wake of the Commonwealth Games recently organised in Delhi in which many street canines (sterilized as well as non-sterilized) were temporarily (for the period of these games) relocated to Animal shelters across Delhi and Noida from many games venues, stadia, hotels, all of whom have now been released back into the areas where they were picked up from (and those canines that were not sterilized were also sterilized in the process and vaccinated against Rabies at the shelters/hospitals they were housed at prior to being released back to their homes). There is a whole scientific basis and reasoning behind doing so and that is what Mr. Karlekar enlightens us all on below. If you still have doubts, drop in a comment underneath or mail us at contact@jaagruti.org

—

The Pioneer EDITS | Saturday, October 23, 2010, By Hiranmay Karlekar

It’s a fallacy to believe that killing street dogs will bring down their numbers. But sterilising them helps in reducing and stabilising their population

According to a report, the Mayor of Delhi has said in an interview to a news channel that the national capital’s stray dogs, which had been removed from their habitats for the duration of the Commonwealth Games, should be killed or kept where they had been taken. He, however, has also reportedly said on television that it was inhuman to kill dogs. I have neither heard either statement nor talked to him. I will, therefore, not go into what he did or did not say. Nor will I criticise him on that account. Instead, I would focus on the issues in question.

Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules, notified in December 2001 under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1960), prohibits the killing of stray dogs except in special cases, as when they are rabid or terminally ill. In these too, prescribed procedures have to be followed. Besides, the Rules provide that stray dogs can only be removed from their habitats for neutering and immunisation against rabies. Both done, they have to be returned to places from which they had been taken.

The Rules prescribe the only scientific — and also humane — way of controlling stray dog populations. Killing or removal has not helped anywhere. Dr K Vogel, Chief Veterinary, Public Health, Division of Communicable Diseases, World Health Organisation, and Mr John Hoyt, then President, World Society for the Protection of Animals, made this clear in their joint preface to the Guidelines for Dog Population Management, released by the WHO and WSPA in May 1990. They stated, “All too often, authorities confronted by problems caused by these (stray) dogs have turned to mass destruction in the hope of finding a quick solution, only to find that the destruction had to continue year after year, with no end in sight.”

In its Eighth Report (WHO Technical Report Series 824), WHO’s Expert Committee on Rabies, which met in Geneva from September 24 to 30, stated, “There is no evidence that the removal of dogs has ever had a significant impact on dog population densities and the spread of rabies. The population turnover of dogs may be so high that even the highest recorded removal rates (about 15 per cent of the dog population) are easily compensated by survival rates.” This has been conclusively established in Delhi. In his “Dogs and Dog Control in Developing Countries”, published in The State of Animals 2005, Dr JF Reese writes, “In Delhi, a concerted effort (pre-Animal Birth Control, or ABC) at dog removal killed a third of the straying dogs with no reduction in dog population.”

It has been the same experience everywhere. In his paper, “ABC responsible for decline in human rabies cases”, Dr Chinny Krishna, co-founder and chairman of the Blue Cross Society of India, cites the instance of Madras Corporation’s catch-and-kill programme that began in 1860. He quotes Mr Theodore Bhaskaran, a retired Post Master-General, as stating in an article, “In the 1970s the number of stray dogs destroyed by the corporation was so high that the Central Leather Institute, Madras, designed products —such as neckties and wallets — from dog skins.” Dr Krishna has pointed out elsewhere that the number of dogs killed by the corporation had gone up to 30,000 per year by 1995. Yet the city’s stray dog population and the incidence of rabies continued to increase.

Why does killing or removal not help? According to the Guidelines for Dog Population Management, each habitat has “a specific carrying capacity for each species”, which “essentially depends on the availability, quality and distribution of the resources (shelter, food, water) for the species concerned. The density of population for higher vertebrates (including dogs) is almost always near the carrying capacity of the environment. Any reduction in the population density through additional mortality is rapidly compensated by better reproduction and survival.”

The argument that such a situation will not arise if all stray dogs in a city or country are killed at one go, holds little water. Nowhere has such a venture succeeded. Besides, dogs are territorial. Dogs from one area do not allow those from other areas to enter their areas. Dogs from other areas will occupy any area in which all stray dogs have been massacred. This territorial character of dogs lies at the heart of the ABC programme. With sterilised and vaccinated dogs keeping un-sterilised and un-vaccinated dogs away from their areas, those implementing the programme can concentrate on progressing area by area until a whole city is covered. Otherwise, they will have to keep returning to areas where they had already been with the stray dog population continuing to grow elsewhere.

Significantly, WHO’s Expert Consultation on Rabies, held in Geneva from October 5 to 8, 2004, had stated (WHO: Technical Report Series 824), “Since the 1960s, ABC programmes coupled with rabies vaccination have been advocated as a method to control urban street male and female dog populations and ultimately human rabies in Asia The rationale is to reduce the dog population turnover as well as the number of dogs susceptible to rabies in Asia and limit aspects of male dog behaviour (such as dispersal and fighting) that facilitate the spread of rabies.”

Delhi has had a reasonably successful ABC programme since 2003. Between 40 and 50 per cent of the dogs removed from the Commonwealth Games sites to the care of NGOs were found neutered. At this rate the target of 70 per cent, required to stabilise and then gradually bring down stray dog populations, should be reached in the next few years. Meanwhile, one needs to congratulate the Government and Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the New Delhi Municipal Council and NGOs like Friendicoes, Cure & Care, Sonadi, PAWS and Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre and SPCA NOIDA for the manner in which they temporarily relocated and looked after around 700 dogs. The glitches that occurred were perhaps inevitable in an exercise of the magnitude undertaken. While Mr Rakesh Mehta, Chief Secretary of Delhi, and Mr KS Mehra, Commissioner of MCD, cut through all bureaucratic red tape to promptly take the big decisions, Dr RBS Tyagi and Dr Alok Agarwal of MCD and Dr Dinesh Yadav of NDMC worked tirelessly, almost round-the-clock. Animal lovers throughout India need to warmly applaud all of them.

by

Commonwealth Games and Street Dogs

 

(Courtesy: Associated Press, http://oneclick.indiatimes.com)

 

After the news of the report submitted by Commonwealth Games Federation President and CEO was made public by the electronic media early this week,  it was apparently qouted and shown in the photographs submitted by the committee that, “there were pug marks of street dogs on the mattresses in the apartments of the games villages that are due to host the athletes as well as their faeces littered in the Games village”.

Since people in foriegn countries are not used to co-existing with dogs the way we Indians are, the CWG commitee had expressed their concern regarding the presence of street dogs in the Games village and asked for their removal.

But as per the Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, Delhi High Court orders and orders of the Supreme Court, the street dogs from any area can be removed only for sterilization and vaccination purposes and then they have to be released back into the same area from where they were picked up.

Thus, due to the timely intervention of Major General (Retd) Dr. R.M Kharb, Chairperson, Animal Welfare Board of India and Mr. Hiranmay Karlekar, Member, Animal Welfare Board of India and the pro-active humane outlook adopted by the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Mr. K.S Mehra, IAS and the Chief Secretary, Government of Delhi Government, Mr. Rakesh Mehta, IAS- the street dogs living in and around the venues earmarked for the Commonwealth Games, 2010- have got a reprieve and in the process India has set an example in front of the other countries of the world with regard to humane treatment of street animals and has also in the process respected its own laws and India’s constitution.

Now the task of picking them up and looking after them till the period of the Games has been entrusted into the hands of SPCA Noida, Cure n Care, Sonadi Animal Care Hospital Friendicoes SECA, an NGO based out of South Delhi, who will be housing them at their South Delhi, Ghazipur and Gurgaon centres where each dog will be given a token with details of the area from where it was picked up.

Volunteers and food are invited by all these NGOs to help in tagging and feeding of the dogs coming in every day and also for helping release them back into their respective territories after the games get over. However, please remember to contact these respective shelters prior to going in there (The contact numbers of all these shelters can be accessed here).

In the interim period, if these dogs will are sterilized and vaccinated by the NGO, then that would be an added bonus for these dogs and the city.

Click on the thumbnails below to read the communication issued by Animal Welfare Board of India’s Chairperson to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD):

Below is the news in today’s Times of India with regard to this initiative and here is the link to today’s online news on this subject.