19/08/2025
स्ट्रीट डॉग्स में मुद्दे को सुप्रीम कोर्ट की Three judges Bench ने डॉग्स के शेल्टर के आर्डर को रिज़र्व कर रखा है । ऐसी स्तिथि में MCD किसी भी डॉग्स को ज़बरदस्ती नहीं उठा सकती अगर वो ऐसा करती है तो उन्हें नीचे लिखी ईमेल भेजे कि वो गैर-कानूनी काम कर रहे है । आप लोगो से निवेदन है कि इसे कॉपी कर फॉरवर्ड करे ताकि बाद में MCD को कोर्ट में घसीटा जा सक। MCD के कमिश्नर और कर्मचारियों पर क्रिमिनल केस फाइल किया जा सके।
To,
The Commissioner
Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD)
Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre, Minto Road, Ajmeri Gate,
New Delhi – 110002
Email: [email protected]
Subject: Cease and Desist Order — Removal or Relocation of Community Dogs Despite Reserved Judgment by Three-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Respected Sir / Madam,
1. Pending and Reserved Matter Before Hon’ble Supreme Court: It is respectfully brought to your notice that the issue concerning management of community/stray dogs in Delhi is currently under adjudication before a three-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and that the judgment has been reserved on14.08.2025 . While the matter remains sub-judice, any unilateral action in the form of dog removal or relocation and cruelty with them in-absence of a valid direction from the Court—would constitute a direct violation of jurisdiction and interfere with the judicial process.
2. Illegality under the PCA Act, 1960, and IPC:
The ongoing actions by MCD officials—specifically catching, transporting, and relocating community dogs—lack any lawful mandate and infringe upon the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (PCA Act), especially Sections 11 and 38 that prescribe due procedure before handling animals. Moreover, such acts may attract criminal liabilities under Sections 428 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code, which penalize mischief by killing, maiming, poisoning, or rendering animals permanently useless.
3. Binding Precedents and Constitutional Mandates
Regulatory interdicts such as Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja (2014) 7 SCC 547 affirm that animals—creatures capable of suffering—are entitled to dignified treatment under Article 21 of the Constitution. Various judicial pronouncements from the Delhi High Court also underscore humane, non-invasive, and health-centric intervention (e.g., ABC programmes) rather than arbitrary displacement.
4. Violation of Court Orders & Contempt Liability
Proceeding with dog removal or relocation in defiance of the reserved status of the Supreme Court’s judgment amounts to contempt of the High Court and Supreme Court. Such action risks subverting the judicial process and prejudicing the outcome of the pending verdict.
5. Urgent Demand for Immediate Action:
In view of the foregoing, you are hereby demanded, forthwith, to:
• Cease and desist from any further removal or relocation of community dogs until such time as the Supreme Court issues its judgment.
• Restore immediately any dogs already removed or relocated in contravention of the law and pending judicial order, to their original environments.
• Initiate departmental inquiry into the actions of officials responsible for enforcing or directing such illegal removals.
• Adopt and implement humane, scientifically appropriate, and legally compliant alternatives—such as ABC (Animal Birth Control) and vaccination drives—only with due permission or lawful directive.
Failure to comply will compel me to initiate prompt contempt proceedings before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, alongside lodging criminal complaints under IPC Sections 428/429 and relevant sections of the PCA Act against officials concerned.
We trust the MCD will respect the rule of law, abide by court orders, and uphold the constitutional duty to treat living beings with dignity.
Regards
Your Name
