“The Law Safeguards Both Human and Animal Life”: Kerala High Court Directs Formation of District Panels for Stray Dog Attack Compensation | Halts Euthanasia Provision Pending Further Orders
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Kerala Single Bench of Justice C.S. Dias has issued a comprehensive interim order in a batch of writ petitions concerning the alarming rise in stray dog attacks across the state. The Court directed the Government of Kerala and Local Self Government Institutions to implement existing legal frameworks and judicial directions aimed at curbing the menace. It mandated the formation of District-Level Committees for adjudicating compensation claims by victims of stray dog attacks and temporarily stayed the government's proposal to implement euthanasia of stray dogs under Rule 8 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Animal Husbandry Practices and Procedures) Rules, 2023.
The Court recorded that over three lakh stray dogs inhabit the State and noted a significant spike in related fatalities and injuries. The Government’s failure to implement the Animal Birth Control Rules and utilize allocated funds was pointed out. Appreciating the steps proposed by the State, the Court stated the primacy of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution and called for a balanced approach that respects both human and animal rights. The matter has been posted for further proceedings on 19.08.2025.
The batch of writ petitions collectively addresses the increasing incidents of stray dog attacks in Kerala and the resultant claims for compensation by victims. The petitions sought various reliefs ranging from quashing of compensation orders to directions for removing stray dogs from private properties.
The petitions include:
- A plea to direct the 8th respondent to consider a complaint concerning injuries sustained in a stray dog attack.
- A challenge to an order directing a Panchayat to pay compensation to the kin of a victim who died in a stray dog attack.
- A request for continued infrastructure and funding for the functioning of the Justice Siri Jagan Committee.
- A prayer for immediate removal of stray dogs from private properties.
- Petitions seeking quashing of various orders directing municipalities and Panchayats to pay compensation to victims.
The Court noted that the issue was not new and had been previously addressed in multiple judgments including Ajayan M.R. and others v. State of Kerala and others [2015 (5) KHC 752] and In re: Bruno (Suo Motu) [2022 (6) KHC 52], wherein directions were issued to mitigate the stray dog menace.
Despite these directions, the situation has worsened. Statistics furnished by the State indicated that there are over three lakh stray dogs in Kerala. In a six-month period alone, sixteen fatalities and over one lakh injuries were reported due to dog attacks.
The Court observed that the root cause of the increase in stray dog population was the failure to implement the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, and the Animal Birth Control Rules of 2001 and 2023.
During the proceedings, the Court took note of a high-level meeting held on 16.07.2025 under the joint chairmanship of the Ministers for Local Self Government and Animal Husbandry. The minutes of the meeting disclosed that 17 Animal Birth Control (ABC) Centres were currently non-functional. Of the Rs. 98 crores allocated for dog control measures, only Rs. 13 crores had been spent. In 2024-2025, only 15,767 stray dogs were sterilized.
A letter dated 26.07.2025 from the Additional Chief Secretary to the Additional Advocate General laid out the State Government's response. The letter cited ongoing initiatives including intensified sterilization and vaccination drives, shelter arrangements for unfit dogs, and public awareness campaigns.
Key provisions of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, were stated, such as installation of CCTV at ABC centres, postoperative care for dogs, geo-tagging during capture and release, and mandatory housing conditions. The letter also recorded the public protests that hindered ABC centre operations, as seen in Koppalam, Kodiyeri, Thalassery.
Efforts were also being made to improve waste management, restrict dumping, and impose fines on violators. Additional steps included establishing portable ABC centres in each block, launching statewide vaccination drives, and proposing amendments to ABC Rules to ease compliance.
The Government also planned to form district-level committees to process compensation claims. These committees would consist of the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority; District Medical Officer; and Joint Director of the Local Self Government Department.
While appreciating these efforts, the Court recorded its concern over the inclusion of euthanasia under Rule 8 of the 2023 Rules. Consequently, it deferred implementation of Rule 8 until further orders.
The Court stated in clear terms: "The issue at hand is not novel." Referring to earlier judgements, it noted: "Division Benches of this Court have issued comprehensive directions to combat the stray dog menace rampant in the State. Notwithstanding the directions, the situation has worsened over the years."
The statistics presented a grave picture. The Court recorded: "There are over three lakh stray dogs in the State. In the past six months alone, sixteen lives have been lost, and more than one lakh persons have suffered injuries in stray dog attacks."
Attributing the exponential rise in stray dog population to inaction, the Court remarked: "The exponential increase in population of stray dogs is primarily attributable to the failure of stakeholders to implement the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2001 and 2023, and the directions passed by this Court from time to time."
The Court referred to Article 21 of the Constitution and stated: "The fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution is not merely a right to survive, but a right to live a dignified and meaningful life. The state and its instrumentalities have a corresponding duty to ensure that the rights guaranteed to persons under Article 21 are not infringed."
Citing precedent, the Court recalled the judgement in Animal Welfare Board of India and another v. Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions and others [2006 KHC 561], noting: "The right to life of a human being shall take precedence over the statutory rights afforded to animals. While humane treatment of animals is mandated, it cannot override human safety."
The Court also referred to Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of India [2023 KHC 6583], recording: "Animals do not possess fundamental rights under the Constitution... Article 21 has been conferred on a person as opposed to a citizen, which is the case of Article 19 of the Constitution."
However, it maintained: "While animal rights are necessary and have to be respected, they cannot trump the fundamental rights of human beings. However, a balance has to be struck for co-existence."
It cited Sections 325 and 291 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as examples of such balance, stating: "The above provisions confirm that the law safeguards both human and animal life."
Appreciating the State’s proactive stance, the Court stated: "If the initiatives are implemented earnestly and, in their letter, and spirit, it would substantially mitigate the problem at hand and ensure human life and safety."
Nonetheless, the Court restrained the State from implementing euthanasia measures as outlined in Rule 8, recording: "The decision of the Government to implement Rule 8... cannot be permitted until further orders."
The Court directed the Government of Kerala and all the Local Self Government Institutions in the State of Kerala to implement the directions in Ajayan M.R.'s case and In re: Bruno's case, along with the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023.
The Principal Secretary of the Local Self Government Department was directed to file a counter-affidavit in W.P.(C) No.45100/2024 within two weeks, specifically stating the approximate population of stray dogs in the State, the number of incidents due to stray dog bites over the past year, the number of deaths reported, and the number of persons who have been administered anti-rabies vaccines.
The State Police Chief and the State Disaster Management Authority were suo motu impleaded in W.P.(C) No.45100/2024 as additional respondents. The State Police Chief was directed to file a statement within two weeks stating details of the crimes registered under Sections 291 and 325 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 during the last one year.
The competent authority of the State Disaster Management Authority was directed to place on record the Regulation or Notification by which compensation is paid to victims of wild animal attacks.
The Member Secretary, Kerala State Legal Services Authority (KeLSA), was directed to collect pending claim petitions from the Registry of the Justice Siri Jagan Committee and forward them to the respective District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) based on jurisdiction.
The Member Secretary, KeLSA, was further directed to take steps to constitute District-Level Committees in the 14 Districts, in consultation with the Government of Kerala, within one month from the date of the order. The Committees are to consist of the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority; District Medical Officer; and the Joint Director, Local Self Government Department.
These Committees were directed to renumber all received claim petitions, treat them as duly filed, issue notices to complainants and the Local Self Government Institutions concerned, and adjudicate the petitions in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible. The Committees shall adopt the method and procedural framework used by the Justice Siri Jagan Committee.
Victims of stray dog attacks are permitted to file fresh claim petitions either physically or online before the District or Taluk Service Committees. Petitions submitted before the Taluk Service Committees shall be forwarded to the office of the District Legal Services Authority. Nodal Officers of DLSAs and TLSAs are to render all necessary support and assistance.
The District Legal Services Authorities were directed to maintain necessary registers and records, and ensure that regular sittings are held.
The Member Secretary, KeLSA, was instructed to frame and issue necessary practice directions and procedural guidelines to ensure uniform, effective, and streamlined functioning of the Committees. A report on the steps taken to implement these directions is to be submitted within one month.
The decision of the Government of Kerala to implement Rule 8 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Animal Husbandry Practices and Procedures) Rules, 2023 was directed to be deferred until further orders, in view of the observations recorded in paragraph 17 of the order.
Considering the seriousness of the matter, Senior Advocate Sri. Deepak P. was appointed as Amicus Curiae. The Registry was directed to provide the learned Amicus Curiae with copies of all pleadings in the connected cases.
The matter was posted for further proceedings on 19.08.2025.
Case Title: Keerthana Sarin v State of Kerala and Connected Cases
Case Number: WP(C) 21206/ 2025 and connected cases
Bench: Justice C.S. Dias
