Mohit Chauhan on SC's stray dog order: ‘The blame goes to the MCD'
'I am really shocked to learn about this. It's not part of our values. Even the Constitution gives animals their right to health and survival, and even Prime Minister Modi has encouraged people to take care of animals. Earlier rulings too, had been in favour of animals. This is an impractical and inhuman decision,' Mohit tells us.
On Monday, the Supreme Court gave the verdict, aimed at tackling rising dog bite incidents. As per the ruling, municipal bodies have been ordered to capture, sterilise, vaccinate, and house stray dogs—without returning them to the streets.
Mohit, who worls closely with an animal shelter — which takes care of 400 dogs apart from other animals — in the Capital, believes the responsibility for the current crisis lies squarely with civic authorities.
'If municipal committees had done their job, the population wouldn't have skyrocketed. This is a human-created problem. They didn't come from another country—they were adopted and then abandoned by people. There are pedigreed dogs on the streets because people can't take care of them. We feel so sad,' he said said.
For Mohit, the numbers make the order impossible to execute. 'More than three lakh dogs in eight weeks? That's too much. You'd require a minimum of 10,000 shelters, with land, staff, vets… and who is going to monitor what's happening in these shelters?' he says.
Citing cultural and historical ties, the 59-year-old singer reminds that 'dogs have been part of our mythology and literature for centuries,' and warns of ecological imbalance if they are removed entirely. 'They act as guards against anti-social elements. Remove them and you risk a rise in rodents and other problems. They haven't spent time researching this—it will create an ugly situation and huge distress for animals,' he says.
Mohit says he has personally invested time and money in caring for strays. 'We work with a place near our home on sterilisation and feeding. These shelter workers should be collaborating with authorities to find a sustainable solution.'
The lack of veterinary infrastructure, he adds, is another barrier. 'We visit veterinary facilities and often there are no doctors there. If you push dogs into shelters, who will give them food, water, basic care? How many people will be employed, and where will the money come from?' he asks
For Mohit, the love and loyalty of dogs make this fight deeply personal. 'When I meet dogs, they recognise me. The kind of love they shower is beautiful. We must protect that bond—not break it in the name of a quick fix,' Mohit concludes, hoping the verdict will be revised soon.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
3 minutes ago
- Hans India
Kerala CM Vijayan criticises PM Modi for 'glorifying RSS' in I-Day speech
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Saturday criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi, accusing him of using the country's 79th Independence Day address to glorify the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and V.D. Savarkar. 'It's not acceptable at all as the attempt to project the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and V.D. Savarkar as central figures in India's independence movement. Choosing Independence Day itself to glorify those who compromised with colonial powers is being seen as an insult to the freedom struggle,' Vijayan wrote on social media. He went on to point out that the RSS was banned in the aftermath of Mahatma Gandhi's assassination, while Savarkar himself faced trial in the conspiracy linked to Mahatma Gandhi's murder. 'Associating them with the 'fatherhood of freedom' is a denial of history. PM Modi's Independence Day address, which indirectly valorised the RSS, was a misuse of the solemn occasion. Moreover, the decision of the Union Petroleum Ministry's Independence Day greeting card placing Savarkar's image above Gandhi's is nothing but a part of a larger conspiracy to rewrite history,' added Vijayan. 'India's independence movement was a collective battle, cutting across caste, creed, language, and religion. In contrast, the RSS distanced itself from the movement and openly opposed its ideological foundations. Instead of inclusive Indian nationalism, it promoted a majoritarian Hindutva vision,' added Vijayan. Citing history, Vijayan further pointed out that when the Constituent Assembly adopted the Constitution on November 26, 1949, the RSS mouthpiece Organizer editorialised that the Manusmriti should have been the guiding text instead of the Constitution. Similarly, the Hindu Mahasabha under Savarkar had even boycotted the celebrations of August 15, 1947. 'Those who turned their backs on the freedom struggle are now attempting to insert themselves into its history, while sidelining real martyrs, such as those of the Punnapra-Vayalar uprising or the victims of the Wagon Tragedy. Those who call for commemorating Partition horrors on August 14 have little moral standing to lecture the nation on Independence Day,' wrote Vijayan. Vijayan ends his piece by stating that any attempt to replace the legacy of humanism and unity with sectarian hatred must be resisted collectively.
India Today
25 minutes ago
- India Today
3-year law practice must for entry-level exams to become judge: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Thursday chose not to modify its earlier verdict that mandates a minimum of three years of law practice for law graduates to appear in entry-level judicial services examinations. The court said any modification could open a 'Pandora's box,' signaling its firm stance on maintaining uniform eligibility standards across the matter arose from a plea filed by a judge from Madhya Pradesh, who sought reconsideration of the May 20 petitioner requested that serving judicial officers be allowed to appear in judicial services examinations, taking into account their experience as judges. The original verdict, delivered by a bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai, barred fresh law graduates from appearing in entry-level judicial services specified that a law graduate must practice law for at least three years before being eligible. The court, however, clarified that the experience gained during legal internships could be counted toward the three-year recent plea argued that sitting judicial officers, by virtue of their work in courts, have practical experience equivalent to practising lawyers and should therefore be eligible for the exams in other Thursday, the bench, comprising Chief Justice Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, rejected the COURT UPHOLDS ELIGIBILITY, BARS SERVING JUDGES FROM APPEARINGThe bench emphasised that allowing serving judges to take the exams would disrupt the uniformity of eligibility and potentially create administrative and legal complications. 'What is wrong in Madhya Pradesh? we will not modify this. This will open Pandora's box,' the Chief Justice said while dismissing the Supreme Court's decision has reinforced the principle that judicial services examinations are meant for those who have spent a minimum period in legal verdict aims to maintain a clear distinction between law graduates entering the judiciary through practice and those already serving in the judicial experts have noted that the ruling will standardise entry requirements across states, preventing ad hoc eligibility the same time, it limits avenues for judicial officers seeking transfers or appearing in exams outside their current this judgment, law graduates seeking entry into judicial services now have a definitive guideline: three years of active legal practice is a non-negotiable court's decision underscores the importance of uniform eligibility standards for the judicial recruitment process and avoids exceptions that could lead to inconsistent interpretations in different states.- Ends
News18
33 minutes ago
- News18
'Can't Amend Constitution': Centre Opposes SC's Timeline For President, Governors To Clear Bills
Last Updated: The submission comes in response to a SC order in April that prescribed a three-month timeline for the President and a one-month window for Governors to decide on pending bills The Centre has opposed the idea of setting fixed deadlines for the President and Governors to clear bills, cautioning that such a move would disrupt the constitutional balance of power. The submission comes in response to a Supreme Court order in April that prescribed a three-month timeline for the President and a one-month window for Governors to decide on pending legislation. 'Even under its extraordinary powers vested in Article 142, the Supreme Court cannot amend the Constitution or defeat the intent of the Constitution makers, provided there are no such procedural mandates in the constitutional text," Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued. In its written note to the court, the government warned that imposing such timelines would amount to 'constitutional chaos" by allowing one organ of the state to assume powers not vested in it. While acknowledging that there may be 'some limited problems in implementation" of the current system, Mehta said those concerns cannot justify 'reducing the higher office of the Governor to a subordinate one." Under Article 200, a Governor may give assent to a bill, withhold it, return it for reconsideration, or reserve it for the President's approval. Once a bill is passed again by the legislature, the Governor is bound to assent, but can still reserve it for Presidential consideration if it raises constitutional or national concerns. The Supreme Court's April 12 ruling, delivered in a case concerning Tamil Nadu, attempted to regulate this process by introducing deadlines for Constitutional heads. The order drew objections, with President Droupadi Murmu formally seeking the Court's opinion under Article 143 on whether such timelines were constitutional. In July, a Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai scheduled hearings on the Presidential reference for August 19. The bench, which also includes Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha, and Atul S Chandurkar, has asked both the Centre and states to file their written submissions by August 12. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
