Asianet NewsableAsianet Newsable

'In Re: Bruno': HC lists 8 steps for Kerala govt to end frighteningly frequent acts of animal cruelty

The directives came after a bench comprising Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Gopinath P took suo motu cognisance of the brutal killing of a dog named Bruno by three men on Kerala Adimalathura beach after the video of the incident went viral on social media.

Bruno case: Kerala HC lists 8 steps for govt to end frighteningly frequent acts of animal cruelty-VPN
Author
Thiruvananthapuram, First Published Jul 2, 2021, 9:02 PM IST

The instances of animal cruelty are now frighteningly frequent, the Kerala High Court on Friday observed before issuing a list of eight directives to the Kerala government.

The directives came after a bench comprising Justice AK Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Gopinath P took suo motu cognisance of the brutal killing of a dog named Bruno by three men on Kerala Adimalathura beach after the video of the incident went viral on social media.

While seeking a report on actions taken by the Kerala government in response to the complaint made by Bruno's owner, Christuraj, following the animal's death, the court gave the following directives.

* We direct the Registry to rename this writ petition as "In Re: Bruno (Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation Proceedings initiated by the High Court in the matter of executive and legislative inaction of the State Government in the matter of Protection of Animal Rights)". This would be a fitting tribute to the hapless dog that succumbed to acts of human cruelty.

* Immediate steps must initiate change in the attitude of the citizenry to the welfare of animals so that gruesome incidents do not recur in future.

* The state government must issue directions to corporations, municipalities and panchayats ensuring compliance with statutory obligations like provision of animal shelters, dog pounds, cattle sheds etc. Local self-government institutions will further ensure that there is no delay occasioned in such compliance on account of insufficiency of funds.

* The state cannot cite insufficiency of funds to shirk away from a discharge of its constitutional obligations. Supreme Court has, in the case of Animal Welfare Board of India v. A.Nagaraja & Others, has recognised five freedoms as inherent in all animals, and treated the said freedoms as similar to the rights guaranteed to the country's citizens under Part III of our Constitution.

* The state government will explore the possibility of holding and promoting animal adoption camps throughout the state at periodic intervals at least thrice a year. Persons can be encouraged at these camps to adopt animals either abandoned by their owners or left to wander in the streets.

* State government will explore the possibility of entrusting district administrations with the power to probe complaints of cruelty to animals and infringement of animal rights. 

* Animal Welfare Board of India has given directions, discouraging the insertion of clauses in residential apartment associations' bye-laws that prohibit the keeping of pets and recognising individuals' right to keep pets in residential apartments.

* Additional Advocate General Asok M Cherian will inform the court of the steps taken by the state government to reconstitute, and render functional, the State Animal Welfare Board.

Follow Us:
Download App:
  • android
  • ios