Delhi High Court


Delhi High Court: A single Judge bench of Jasmeet Singh, J., decided a writ petition pertaining to the ongoing problem of feeding of stray dogs in a Delhi locality, accordingly, gave directions to the respondents to identify a place to feed the stray dogs in accordance with the guidelines laid down by various Courts, Supreme Court, and Animal Welfare Board of India1.

The petition was filed with the prayer to stop every form of obstruction created by the respondents from feeding the stray dogs in the locality of Keshav Puram, Delhi and requesting the respondent state to install or assign a feeding spot for the stray dogs. The petitioner further prayed to act against the illegal disposing and heavy trimming of trees by the respondents without obtaining written permission of the Forest department. The petitioner had also prayed to make temporary dog shelters during the winter season for protection from the chilling cold nights.

Additional Standing Counsel, Ms. Nandita Rao pointed to the growing problem of stray dogs in every locality of Delhi and stated that the Investigating Officer will earmark an area wherein the petitioner will be permitted to feed the stray dogs twice a day.

In response to which the petitioner assured and undertook to strictly adhere to the timeline as well as the earmarked area while feeding the stray dogs. Further, the petitioner stated to ensure regular vaccination and sterlisation as well.

Keeping in view the statements made above by the parties, the Court directed the respondents to identify a place to feed the stray dogs in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Courts, Supreme Court and AWBI.

Additionally, the Deputy Director of the Horticulture Department, Rohini assured the Court that only pruning of trees as permissible in law, is being carried out in the parks of Keshav Puram, Delhi. He also assured the Court that all the trees are free of cement around the base of the trunks which shall be regularly maintained.

[Parvinder Kaur Malhotra v. The State GNCTD, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4641, decided on 22-12-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

For the Petitioner- Advocate Niharika Kashyap;

For the Respondent- Additional Standing Counsel Nandita Rao.

Advocate Amit Peshwan;

Advocate Saransh;

Additional Standing Counsel Puneet Yadav.


Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.