Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: A 2-Judge Bench comprising of Dilip B Bhosale, CJ. and Yashwant Varma, J., dealt with a public interest litigation for giving directions for the purpose of protecting shelter homes as a lot of cases were coming where the shelter homes management were in question.

The matter came for review before the Court for further directions pursuant to the earlier order passed in these proceedings. Additional Advocate General submitted that proposals formulated would help the Court in passing further directions and for formulation of policy for monitoring shelter homes in the State. Court noted that it was directed by the State to the Director, Academy of Management Studies, Lucknow to undertake a social audit of all shelter homes, however, no audit was actually conducted. In another order, a seven-member committee was created to formulate directives for shelter homes in the State. Interim directions were given to District Judges to form monitoring committee for inspection of shelter homes.

The Additional Chief Secretary had brought before the Court that currently there were no codified norms to protect the shelter homes except the ones established or run under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Court did not agree with the averments of Additional Chief Secretary and mentioned provisions of Swadhar Greh Scheme framed by the Union Government related to shelter homes.

Last direction to be given was related to installation of CCTV cameras which was contested by the Additional Chief Secretary to have been already installed. With above directions, the Court disposed of this petition. [Abuse of Girls in a Women Shelter Home, Deoria, In re, (PIL) No. 4112 of 2018, order dated 05-09-2018]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: The Division Bench of V.K. Bist and Alok Singh, JJ. has ordered in a Public Interest Litigation to shift all stray dogs with the State to shelter houses within six months.

The question before the Court was whether the life of a citizen is important than the stray dogs and whether the State authorities are duty bound/responsible for protecting/saving the life of the public of the State from the dog biting of stray dogs. Petitioner submitted that during last five years, more than eleven thousand cases of dog biting have come into light in which several persons have died also.

Though counsel for the State submitted that the work in this regard is to be done by the respective municipal bodies but considering the importance of the matter, the Court directed the Chief Secretary of the State to issue necessary directions to all concerned for taking appropriate steps in this regard. It was also made clear that the direction issued by the Chief Secretary of the State will be binding on all the authorities and non-compliance of the same would be treated as contempt of Court.

First of all, the authority concerned will have to determine the number of stray dogs in every town, city, and village. Necessary arrangements will have to be made for the construction of shelter house in every place. Court also suggested that the State Government may consider for making a law regarding the killing of dangerous stray dogs. The municipal and local authorities will also have to verify from each and every house whether their dogs are registered with the municipal board and if they found that the dogs are not registered they would ensure the registration as per law. [Girish Chandra Kholia v. State Of Uttarakhand,2018 SCC OnLine Utt 556, order dated 14-06-2018]