Delhi court raps animal centre for failing to release 10 seized dogs to owner

A Delhi court criticized the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre for misusing authority and ordered the immediate return of 10 dogs to their owner.

NEW DELHI

The court directed SGACC to immediately release the dogs to their owner and submit the status report during the next hearing, on January 22. (Shutterstock)

A Delhi court on Friday pulled up the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre (SGACC) for “grossly misusing authority” despite clear judicial directions to return 10 dogs that are in its custody to their rightful owner, noting that the welfare of animals cannot be allowed to suffer on account of “lame excuses” or “administrative delay”.

The sharp observations were made by Additional Sessions Judge Surabhi Sharma Vats of Karkardooma Courts.

The court said, “The continued retention of dogs, despite clear judicial directions, amounts to gross misuse of authority and is wholly impermissible in law”.

The judge said that courts were duty-bound to ensure that orders are implemented in letter and spirit, more so where the subject matter involved animal welfare and fundamental principles of justice.

During a hearing earlier this week, the court had sharply criticised what it termed as “gross lapses” in the shelter’s care and record-keeping for seized animals, while demanding a status report from SGACC, detailing records of the total number of animals in custody, their health status, among other aspects.

The court had highlighted serious concerns about the welfare of 10 dogs, which are at the centre of a legal dispute.

However, after Vishal moved a Superdari application before the court in August 2025, seeking a temporary release of his pet dogs from the centre’s custody, a trial court directed the centre to release the 10 dogs to Vishal with assistance from the police.

Subsequently, the animal centre moved a revision plea this month, challenging the trial court’s directions.

In its revision plea, SGACC’s counsel argued that releasing the animals to the accused was allegedly contrary to the object and statutory framework of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and claimed practical difficulties in identifying the specific dogs due to staff shortages.

In Friday’s order, the court noted that SGACC had neither submitted the status report nor released the dogs to their owner. “The plea of paucity of time to file detailed status report also appears to be a lame excuse and reflects the casual, negligent and defiant attitude of the revisionist towards the judicial process,” the court said.

The judge further called the centre’s conduct intentional and deliberate, only to frustrate the execution of orders.

“The revisionist cannot be permitted to frustrate the execution of Court orders by taking false, evasive and bogus pleas, particularly when the issue pertains to living, sentient beings whose welfare cannot be allowed to suffer on account of lame excuses or administrative delay,” the court said.

The court directed SGACC to immediately release the dogs to their owner and submit the status report during the next hearing, on January 22.