New Delhi: The Supreme Court, continuing its hearing in the suo motu case on stray dog management in public spaces, on Friday made it clear that allegations of harassment, assault, or use of derogatory language against women feeding dogs constitute criminal offences, and such issues must be addressed under the penal law and not before the apex court in individual cases.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N.V. Anjaria was hearing submissions from animal rights activists, NGOs and victims’ groups in the matter.
During the hearing, senior advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani, appearing for an animal rights activist, alleged that women dog feeders across the country were facing harassment, assaults, and public humiliation by so-called “anti-feeder vigilantes”, and that in several cases, the police had failed to register FIRs despite complaints.
The senior counsel cited instances where women were allegedly beaten, molested and defamed, including claims that in some housing societies in Haryana, bouncers had been hired to target dog feeders.
Pavani argued that the authorities’ inaction amounted to passive endorsement of such acts.
Responding to the submissions, the Justice Vikram Nath-led Bench advised the aggrieved individuals to approach the local police, magistrates or jurisdictional High Courts. However, it clarified that the Supreme Court could not sit in judgment over individual criminal complaints.
“If someone is harassing women, it is a crime under the Penal Code. Get FIRs registered. There are procedures available,” the apex court observed, adding that the issue raised was essentially one of law and order.
On allegations regarding derogatory and abusive remarks made against women dog feeders on social media and elsewhere, the bench observed that such statements do not fall under the protection of free speech if they infringe upon a woman’s dignity, reiterating that legal remedies are available under existing laws.
The Supreme Court clarified that the scope of the proceedings was confined to stray dog management and public safety, and would not extend to unrelated issues such as dog breeding or the import of foreign breeds.
Further, the top court also declined a request to view videos allegedly depicting cruelty to dogs, observing that the internet was full of videos showing both animal abuse and dog attacks on children and elderly persons. It said that the hearing should not be converted into a contest of such footage. The hearing in the matter will continue on January 13 (Tuesday).
(IANS)
