It is owner's duty to ensure pet causes no harm to others: Calcutta HC
Calcutta high court
KOLKATA: It is a pet owner's duty to ensure that his/her pets do not harm others, Calcutta High Court has said in a recent order, turning down a man's plea to quash a criminal case slapped on him.
'The potential gravity of a dog attack on a human, capable of causing serious injury or even posing a threat to life, cannot be overstated. Therefore, a pet owner is undeniably duty-bound to exercise a certain degree of care and take sufficient steps to prevent their pet from causing harm,' Justice Uday Kumar said in an order on May 23.
The Sonarpur man was charged under IPC Section 289 after a resident of his apartment complex filed a police complaint saying he was attacked by 10-12 of the man's pet dogs, leading to injuries.
The alleged attack occurred on the roof of the residential building in 2022. The pet owner moved HC seeking dismissal of the criminal charges, which he said were false. He claimed he had only one dog and a medical report of the complainant stated there was 'no obvious external injury'.
Justice Kumar, however, held that whether the investigation was 'botched' was a matter to be tested during trial, when the accused could highlight these lapses.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed!
IC Markets
Start Now
Undo
He noted that even though the medical report did not show 'obvious external injury' as claimed by the defence, the complaint itself alleged an 'attack' by dogs, leading to a 'fall' and 'injury'.
'Even if the injury was not externally obvious, being attacked by 10-12 dogs and falling on a roof could potentially lead to internal injuries, non-visible bruises, or psychological trauma. Furthermore, the complaint highlights a broader concern regarding the practice of keeping 'many dogs...unchained
on the roof of a housing', which, if true, could indeed pose a threat to human life, regardless of immediate physical injury,' the judge observed.
Section 289 IPC, Justice Uday Kumar said, imposed a 'duty on the owner or possessor of an animal' to take adequate measures to prevent any probable danger to human life or grievous hurt from such an animal. He also observed that the exact nature and extent of the injury, and its correlation with the alleged dog attack, were disputed questions of fact.
These discrepancies needed to be taken before the trial court, and the HC could assume 'the role of a fact-finding authority'.
The judge said 289 IPC specifically uses 'knowingly or negligently omits', emphasizing either actual knowledge of the animal's harmful propensity or a lack of due care in its management.
While the police charge sheet said the 10-12 dogs belong to the accused, the pet owner disputed the fact highlighting the absence of documentary proof like municipal registration, veterinary records, purchase receipts and photographic evidence.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
34-year-old Marathi actor Tushar Ghadigaonkar found dead in Mumbai flat
Mumbai: Marathi film actor Tushar Ghadigaonkar, 34, died by suicide by hanging in his rental flat in Goregaon West on Friday. Goregaon police registered a case of accidental death. Preliminary investigations suggest he took this extreme step due to stress over not securing work. He was known for his roles in Marathi films, TV serials and theatre, and also dabbled in production. Ghadigaonkar was also part of the Marathi musical play 'Sangeet Bibat Akhyan' and dabbled in music video production under his own banner Ghanta Naad Production. A police officer stated that the main control room received a message reporting an unconscious person in a flat on Ram Mandir Road, Goregaon West. Officers arrived and found the individual unconscious on the ground. They transported him to Trauma Care Hospital, where the medical officer examined him and declared him dead upon arrival. The officer added that Ghadigaonkar was addicted to alcohol and had been under stress for the past year. He died by suicide by hanging when no one was at home. When the relatives' statements were recorded, they did not express suspicion or complaints against anyone, police said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Take this to lose weight! (Here's how) welladvice Learn More Undo Mumbai: Marathi film actor Tushar Ghadigaonkar, 34, died by suicide by hanging in his rental flat in Goregaon West on Friday. Goregaon police registered a case of accidental death. Preliminary investigations suggest he took this extreme step due to stress over not securing work. He was known for his roles in Marathi films, TV serials and theatre, and also dabbled in production. Ghadigaonkar was also part of the Marathi musical play 'Sangeet Bibat Akhyan' and dabbled in music video production under his own banner Ghanta Naad Production. A police officer stated that the main control room received a message reporting an unconscious person in a flat on Ram Mandir Road, Goregaon West. Officers arrived and found the individual unconscious on the ground. They transported him to Trauma Care Hospital, where the medical officer examined him and declared him dead upon arrival. The officer added that Ghadigaonkar was addicted to alcohol and had been under stress for the past year. He died by suicide by hanging when no one was at home. When the relatives' statements were recorded, they did not express suspicion or complaints against anyone, police said.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Disturbed Areas Act: HC directs Vadodara police to redress grievance of petitioner seeking to ‘enjoy property' bought in 2020
Stating that 'it is the duty of the state to maintain law and order', the Gujarat High Court has directed the Vadodara city police to remedy the grievance of a petitioner seeking police protection to 'enjoy their property' — four years after it ruled in favour of the petitioners following a controversy under the Disturbed Areas Act. In an oral order on June 19, Justice HD Suthar stated, 'Considering the orders passed in Special Criminal Application, Review Application as well as in Letters Patent Appeal, it appears that as the petitioners are owners of the property in question and they want to enjoy their property, (they) have approached the authority, more particularly the Police Inspector, Panigate Police Station, Vadodara on July 7, 2024… till date, nothing has been done…' According to the order, 'In view of the facts of the case and looking to the grievance of the petitioner, the respondent authority concerned is hereby directed to redress the grievance of the petitioner in accordance with law as it is the duty of the State to maintain the law and order. If any adverse outcome is there, the petitioners are at liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum.' The owners of the property, Onali Ezazuddin Dholkawal and Iqbal Hussain Asgarali Tinwala, had moved the court in 2024 seeking directions against the Vadodara city police, particularly Panigate police station, 'to facilitate and effectuate the petitioners to enter and use their commercial property and repair and rehabilitate it'. The petitioners cited notices received from the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC) with warning of the property being in a dilapidated condition and ordered it to be repaired during the period of the long-drawn litigation under the Disturbed Areas Act with multiple petitions. 'The petitioners were receiving notices dated July 1, 2019, September 24, 2021, and June 26, 2023, along with undated notices affixed on the premises by VMC as the property is in a dilapidated condition and is dangerous for the neighbours. But since the petitioners were not being allowed to enter inside the property, the petitioners could not take any steps for the same,' the petition stated. Stating that the petitioners requested police protection to enter the property by way of representation dated October 9, 2021, and also filed a written complaint against the neighbours in April 2022, the petitions stated, 'But somehow, the protection is not granted and no action was taken by the city police and eventually, the petitioners avoided entering the property in order to prevent any law and order situation or untoward incident… The petitioners sought such police protection last April 2024. But unfortunately, even thereafter the petitioners have not been able to enter and use the property… the neighbours and local corporators are creating hurdles and law and order situation.' The petition pointed out that despite being 'assured police protection', the city police has denied the same 'under one pretext or the other'. The petition stated that on July 22, 2024, accompanied by the city police, the petitioners tried to enter the property but 'the neighbours, along with politically influential persons and particularly local corporators… obstructed the entry of the petitioners in presence of police. The said incident was videographed and thus some of the photographs were also taken, which shows the corporators and other persons objecting to the entry of the petitioners.' Following alleged threats, the petitioners also submitted a written complaint to the police the next day, seeking an FIR, 'which has not been filed.' The petition stated that the Vadodara City police 'failed to discharge their statutory duties and obligations', which has 'resulted in gross violation of the Fundamental Rights of Article 14, 19 and 21 as enshrined under the Constitution of India' and also a violation of the previous orders of the Gujarat HC. The case pertains to a property located in the old city area of Vadodara, which falls under the purview of the The Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991, also known as the Disturbed Areas Act. The petitioners had sought permission under the Disturbed Areas Act in August 2016 from the Deputy Collector, Vadodara, which was rejected vide in January 2017. Therefore, the petitioners appealed before the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals), which was also rejected in June 2018. In March 2020, the HC ruled in favour of the petitioners in a Special Civil Application and granted permission under the Disturbed Area Act. Thus, the sale deed of the petitioners' property was registered December 15, 2020. Even as the petitioners were not allowed to enter their property, the HC order in the Special Civil Application was challenged by way of review petition being filed by some private persons who were panchas (independent witnesses) to the panchnama prepared for grant of permission. Some 'disgruntled neighbours' also filed an application for being joined in the said review petition, which was rejected by the Gujarat HC in March 2022. The HC, in August 2023, dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal of private persons and imposed costs of Rs 50,000 on two panchas who had raised an objection to the sale of a property. The HC had questioned the motive of the two panchas and noted that they had made their declaration, expressing their 'no objection' to the transfer in 2016, and hence, the court had upheld the sale to be valid and not a distress sale in March 2020. Commissioner of Police, Vadodara, Narasimha Komar was unavailable for comments on Saturday.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
CBI files FIR against ex-officers of JNPT, TCE over ₹800 crore irregularities in dredging project; conducts searches
The CBI has registered a case against former officials of Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust (JNPT) and Tata Consulting Engineers (TCE), as well as as two dredging companies, alleging irregularities worth more than ₹ 800 crore. As per officials, the alleged irregularities are linked to the Capital Dredging Project to deepen ship navigational channels near Mumbai. The federal investigative agency's action comes after three years of a preliminary inquiry that took a look into accusations of inflated estimates, halting of competition to benefit international bidders, extending undue favours to contactors, and suppression of reports of independent expert organisations. The CBI in its FIR has booked named then chief engineer of JNPT Sunil Kumar Madabhavi, then project director of TCE, Devdutt Bose, Boskalis Smit India LLP, Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt Ltd and other unidentified public servants. The case has been lodged under IPC Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 420 (cheating) and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Following the registration of its FIR, the CBI searched five locations in Mumbai and Chennai, including the homes of Madabhavi and Bose, and offices of private companies. The searches led to the recovery of a number of documents relating to the Capital Dredging Project, digital devices and documents showing investments made by public servants, a CBI spokesperson said. The documents recovered are being examined, she said in a statement. No immediate reaction was available from the accused companies. 'The allegations of pecuniary advantage obtained by the private companies as a result of abuse of official position by the JNPT officials resulting into a huge wrongful loss to the exchequer, spread over the period from 2003 to 2014 (phase-I of the project) and 2013 to 2019 (phase-II of the project) was also inquired,' the CBI said in the FIR. The inquiry showed a criminal conspiracy between JNPT officials and other private persons, including an official of Tata Consulting Engineers, and others, which resulted in wrongful loss amounting to ₹ 365.90 crore for phase-I and ₹ 438 crore for phase-II to JNPT due to over-dredging. The case pertains to a project envisaged by the JNPT to deepen and widen the navigational channel it shared with the Mumbai Port in 2003 to cater to the needs of larger size cargo ships. TCE was roped in for preparation of a final report on the planning for dredging activities for the Capital Dredging Phase-I project, which was submitted in 2010 in association with Dredging Solution. TCE was also awarded the work of project management consultant for the project, including preparation of the tender documents and work of supervising the execution of the project, the FIR alleged. The CBI during its preliminary inquiry found that JNPT officials along with TCE executives kept tender conditions to favour foreign bidders, and violated the guidelines of Competition Commission of India by allowing complimentary bidding, and allowed the formation of the joint venture by solely eligible bidders Boskalis Smit India LLP with Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt Ltd (also known as BSI-JDN JV). The CBI inquiry also showed violation of a number of guidelines related to fixation of rates for dredging different type of rocks, delay in project, false claim of ₹ 348 crore by the contractor without actual performance of work, excess payment of ₹ 430 crore, and manipulation of the pre-dredge survey by using a less accurate software, 'Qinsy', among others.
