The Indian Penal Code (IPC) 1860 is the official criminal code of India which covers all substantive aspects of criminal law.
Shorn of unnecessary factual matrix, this matter essentially emanates from the sui generis decisions. Nine years after a Vakola resident’s Scorpio SUV ran over a stray dog at his housing society, Bombay High Court ordered dropping of criminal proceedings against him in 2019 and now for pet dog, The Karnataka High Court on Friday (21st October 2022) in PRATHAP KUMAR.G v. STATE OF KARNATAKA
(CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 1133 OF 2019) held that offences of rash driving or mischief of killing animals under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and offences under Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act) will not be attracted in the event of an accident involving pet animals, the Court held Section 279 of IPC and Section 134 of the Motor Vehicles Act was applicable only when it comes to injuries to human beings and not animals.
Though section 428 and 429 of the IPC provide for punishment of all acts of cruelty such as killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless of animals. Both the above provisions defined under Chapter XVII of the IPC apply only to animals with any monetary value (be it above ten rupees or fifty rupees as mentioned under Section 428 and 429). These provisions hardly attract a crime committed on stray animals because they are not household pets and do not hold any monetary value. On the other hand for household pets, there must be a mens rea which is required to be established for the offence to attract these sections. The Karnataka High Court further held that the general principles of criminal law which would be applicable for any offence under IPC, would apply to both these provisions. “Without such means rea or when animus to commit an offence is absent, it cannot be said that an offence under Section 428 or Section 429 of IPC has occurred,” the Court ruled. Would that lead to people going around crushing innocent animals under the wheels and go scot free by saying that there was no mensrea.
All said and done in both the cases (supra) section 11 of the PCA 1960 was not dealt with. Ultimately the basic cruelty law of India is contained in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960. As far as animal welfare laws are concerned, all acts of cruelty are covered under Section 11 of the Act and must be deliberated while dealing with cases of accidents of innocent animals due to rash driving or other factors. It deals with various forms of cruelties and atrocities perpetrated on both, domesticated and wild animals.
However, there is a still a long way to go in truly developing a solid foundation for animal law in India. The provisions for animal protection in the Indian Constitution remain principles instead of concrete law enforceable in courts. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 is archaic and fails to safeguard animals because the current penalties are too weak to deter people from abusing animals.
Whereas judges are obliged to make their rulings as consistent as reasonably possible with previous judicial decisions on the same subject, as citizens of India it is our fundamental duty to have compassion for all living creatures. The Indian Constitution recognizes animal rights under Article 51(A)(g) and Article 48(A), that mandate every Indian citizen to show compassion towards animals and wildlife.