The Telangana High Court has intervened to prevent the seizure by the Municipal Corporation of a 2-year-old German shepherd pet dog named 'Zorro' belonging to a person residing in an apartment complex.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy passed an interim order on June 26, 2024, staying all proceedings initiated by Respondent No. 3, the Deputy Director of the Veterinary Section of the Geater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation.

The Court's decision came in response to a Writ Petition filed by the aggrieved pet owner, challenging the legality and arbitrariness of attempts to take custody of 'Zorro'.

The petitioner, who resides in an Apartment near Rajbhavan Road, owns a "well-trained and vaccinated" 2-year-old German shepherd, 'Zorro'. The incident leading to legal action allegedly occurred when 'Zorro', off-leash during a walk, playfully approached another resident's dog. Allegedly, the interaction resulted in injuries to the other dog's owner, prompting a complaint under Section 289 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the petitioner.

Subsequently, on June 19, 2024, Respondent No. 3 (Sub-Inspector of Police) issued a letter to the Deputy Director, Veterinary Section, requesting the seizure of 'Zorro', citing allegations of ferocity and public nuisance. Despite professional examination confirming 'Zorro' as friendly and not ferocious, officials accompanied by police attempted to take custody of the dog on June 24, 2024, without prior notice to the petitioner or disclosure of examination findings.

Senior Advocate Vikram Pooserla appearing for the Petitioner argued that the actions of the Sub-Inspector were illegal, arbitrary, and violated principles of natural justice and constitutional rights.

"Animal Welfare Board of India’s guidelines ‘Pet Dog Guidelines, 2015’ stipulate that pet owners are advised to ensure that their pets are not a source of nuisance to others, that in doing so, they may, however, distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable, and lawful and unlawful claims as to their pets being a source of nuisance; and no amount of pressure should lead to an abandonment of a pet animal," the Senior Counsel argued. It was further argued that the Petitioner has exercised a high degree of of care in ensuring that the pet dog does not harm any individuals or animals and has also obtained professional training for the pet dog.

The Senior Counsel also informed the Court that the Petitioner also ensures that the pet dog is on a leash in public spaces. Pooserla further contended that the ‘Rules and Regulations’ of the Petitioner’s apartment association permit the owners to keep pets.

"Article 51-A (g) and (h) of the Constitution of India, 1950 - the fundamental duty of Indian citizens to show compassion for living creatures," the Senior Counsel submitted. He further argued that removing the pet dog from its owners without proper evidence of ferocity or nuisance, based merely on a personal vendetta and unsubstantiated allegations, contravenes constitutional principles and such separation would cause severe mental distress to the Petitioner and their family, and the pet dog.

In response to the submissions made, the Court issued an interim stay on further actions pursuant to the June 19, 2024 letter, pending final adjudication.

"There shall be interim stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the letter dated 19.06.2024 of respondent No. 3- the Sub-Inspector of Police, Punjagutta Police Station, Hyderabad, subject to condition that the petitioner's pet dog 'Zorro' shall be accompanied by the petitioner or her family members at all times," the Court said in its order dated June 26.

Cause Title: Dr. Lokdeep Sharma v. State of Telangana & Others

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Vikram Pooserla, Advocate Shreya Devaki

Justice B Vijaysen ReddyTelangana High Court

Sukriti Mishra