Harassment Of Women Dog Feeders Is Criminal Offence; SC Clarifies Firmly

The Supreme Court on Friday issued a clear warning against the harassment of women who feed stray dogs.

It stated that such conduct amounts to a criminal offence. The court said authorities must address these acts under existing penal laws.

The observation came during the hearing of a suo motu case on stray dog management in public spaces.

The bench included Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N V Anjaria. The court heard submissions from animal rights activists, non-governmental organisations, and victims’ groups.

Senior advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani, representing an animal rights activist, flagged widespread allegations of harassment against women dog feeders.

She said women across several states faced abuse, physical attacks, and public humiliation. She alleged that self-styled ‘anti-feeder vigilantes’ targeted them regularly.

Pavani also claimed that police authorities often refused to register First Information Reports despite formal complaints. She cited incidents where attackers allegedly beat, molested, and defamed women.

Harassment Of Dog Feeders Criminal

In some housing societies in Haryana, she claimed residents hired private bouncers to intimidate dog feeders.

The senior counsel argued that such inaction by authorities reflected tacit approval of unlawful behaviour. She urged the court to intervene.

The Justice Vikram Nath-led bench responded firmly. It advised aggrieved individuals to seek remedies through proper legal channels.

The court directed them to approach local police stations, magistrates, or jurisdictional High Courts. It clarified that the Supreme Court cannot adjudicate individual criminal complaints.

“If someone harasses women, it is a crime under the Penal Code,” the bench observed. It stressed that established procedures exist for registration of FIRs and investigation. The court described the matter as a law-and-order issue.

Addressing abusive remarks against women dog feeders on social media, the bench rejected claims of free speech protection.

It ruled that speech violating a woman’s dignity does not enjoy constitutional safeguards. Legal remedies, it said, already exist.

The court narrowed the scope of the proceedings. It stated that the case concerned stray dog management and public safety only.

It refused to expand the hearing to issues like dog breeding or the import of foreign breeds.

The bench also declined to view videos showing alleged cruelty to dogs. It said online platforms carry footage of both animal abuse and dog attacks.

The hearing should not become a contest of visuals. The matter will resume on January 13.

Also Read: Oshiwara Firing Case: Court Sends Actor KRK To Police Custody Till January 27