Delhi court slams animal shelter for ‘gross lapses’ in care, record-keeping

The order, issued on Tuesday, highlighted concerns about the welfare of 10 dogs at the centre of a legal dispute

A Delhi court has demanded a status report from the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre (SGACC), sharply criticising what it termed as “gross lapses” in the shelter’s care of 10 dogs and record-keeping for animals seized from accused persons.

Animals and birds are not inanimate objects, case property or disposable items, the court told the shelter. (PTI)

Additional sessions judge (ASJ) Surabhi Sharma Vats of Karkardooma Courts issued the order on Tuesday, highlighting serious concerns about the welfare of 10 dogs at the centre of a legal dispute.

The order came during a revision petition filed by SGACC, challenging a trial court’s August directive to release 10 dogs back to a respondent, one Vishal, from whom they were originally seized as part of investigation into a case lodged at Jagatpuri police station.

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.

The court rejected these explanations as “unsatisfactory and evasive,” noting there was no stay on the trial court’s release order. “A shelter for animals claiming custody of thousands of animals is expected to maintain proper records, identification protocols, medical documentation and traceability, particularly in respect of animals taken into custody under authority of law”.

“Animals and birds are not inanimate objects, case property or disposable items. They are living, sentient beings, entitled to life, dignity, and proper care under the law. The issue is thus a matter of life and welfare, and not mere possession or logistics,” the judge stated.

The judge noted that previous submissions from the centre revealed that the dogs were not in good health and some of them might have died in custody. “These statements are extremely alarming, as they indicate gross lapses in supervision, medical care and accountability, raising serious concerns about the manner in which the Revisionist has discharged its statutory duties,” the order read.

The court also expressed alarm over submissions indicating the dogs were in poor health and some may have died in custody. “These statements... indicate gross lapses in supervision, medical care and accountability,” the order read, adding that SGACC “cannot hide behind administrative excuses” for non-compliance.

The court directed SGACC to file a sworn status report by January 16 detailing: the total number of animals and birds taken into custody from accused persons to date; how many died in custody; how many were returned to owners; and the identification protocols and veterinary support provided. The case will be heard next on January 16.