Pet owners are accountable if dogs attack people: Karnataka HC

Bengaluru: Emphasising the responsibility of pet owners to ensure public safety, the Karnataka High Court has declined to interfere with criminal proceedings against a woman whose pet dog allegedly bit another woman on the face.

The order was passed by Justice M Nagaprasanna while hearing a petition filed by Indiranagar resident Lalitha Gopalakrishnan seeking quashing of a first information report (FIR) and criminal case registered against her.

The court observed that pet owners cannot avoid liability if they fail to restrain their dogs and such negligence results in injuries to others. It said leaving a dog without proper control amounts to irresponsible conduct and that such cases deserve to be examined during trial rather than being dismissed at the preliminary stage.

The High Court further noted that the investigating agency had already completed the probe and filed a charge sheet. In view of this, it suggested that the petitioner could approach the trial court seeking discharge if she believed there was insufficient evidence against her. Following the court’s observations, the petition was withdrawn.

During arguments, the petitioner’s counsel maintained that the medical records and spot inspection report did not establish any visible injuries caused by the dog. The defence also argued that the complainant was acquainted with the pet and had approached it on her own. It was further submitted that the dog belonged to a non-aggressive breed and that the complaint had allegedly been filed to seek monetary compensation.

The FIR was registered by the Indiranagar police under Section 291 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, relating to negligent conduct with respect to animals. The criminal proceedings will now continue before the jurisdictional trial court.

Separately, the High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s directions on controlling stray dog populations, noting that the apex court has upheld its earlier orders permitting sterilisation and relocation measures after rejecting petitions seeking modification of those directions.