|
Sivadi Praveena, Member (Judicial) of the Telangana Human Rights Commission (TGHRC), took suo motu cognisance of a reported stray dog attack on a minor girl in Hyderabad on Wednesday, citing serious human rights concerns related to child safety and the right to life.
The case has been registered based on media reports regarding a stray dog attack on a minor girl in Hyderabad. The incident reportedly resulted in grievous facial injuries to the child. Taking note of the gravity of the incident, the Commission observed that the matter raises serious concerns over public safety, particularly the protection of children in residential localities. It further noted a prima facie failure on the part of civic authorities in effectively managing stray dog populations and ensuring a safe environment for residents. Accordingly, the Commission has directed the Commissioner of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC), Hyderabad, to submit a comprehensive report detailing the incident, the immediate action taken by the authorities, and the preventive measures currently in place to address stray dog-related issues. The matter has been posted for submission of the report on February 24, 2026, at 11.00 am. The issue of stray dog management has been under judicial scrutiny at the national level as well. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court clarified that it had not ordered the removal of all dogs from the streets and reiterated that stray dogs must be treated in accordance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules. A three-judge special bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria stated, "We have not directed the removal of every dog from the streets. The direction is to treat them as per the rules." The apex court also observed that dogs can sense fear or trauma in individuals, including those who may have previously suffered dog bites, and may attack such persons. In January, the Supreme Court heard detailed arguments in a suo motu case initiated to address the issue of stray dogs in public places across the country. During the hearings, submissions were made by several senior advocates, including Shyam Divan, Sidharth Luthra, CU Singh, Krishnan Venugopal, Dhruv Mehta, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Karuna Nundy. One of the arguments highlighted that the abrupt removal of stray dogs could lead to a surge in rodent populations, resulting in unintended public health consequences. The bench also noted that overcrowded shelters could facilitate the spread of other diseases among animals. Senior advocate Nakul Dewan suggested the microchipping of dogs to maintain records of vaccination and sterilisation and called for the constitution of an expert committee to comprehensively examine the issue. At the conclusion of the hearing, the bench referred to a report published in the media on December 29, 2025, and directed the lawyers to examine it further. Earlier, on November 7, the Supreme Court, citing the "alarming rise of dog bite incidents," directed all states and Union Territories to ensure the removal of stray dogs from educational institutions, hospitals, public sports complexes, bus stands and railway stations. The court mandated proper fencing of such premises and directed local authorities to shift stray dogs to designated shelters after vaccination and sterilisation in compliance with the ABC Rules. The directions were issued after the apex court took suo motu cognisance of the growing menace of stray dogs across the country. (ANI)
|
