With the seizure of 28 illegal fire-arms and 57 cartridges, registration of 4,712 liquor cases, and a sharp rise to 862 NDPS cases , the Nagpur Rural Police delivered one of their toughest crackdowns on crime in 2025. Along with this, preventive action was taken against 2,178 accused involved in illegal activities. Large-scale operations against crime and unlawful businesses led to seizures worth Rs 7.7 crore by the police during the year. Preventive action against 1,496 According to official records, preventive action under Section 126 of the BNSS increased sharply from 569 cases in 2024 to 1,496 cases in 2025 which marked a 163 per cent rise. Preventive actions under Section 129 BNSS also increased from 1,644 cases to 1,965 cases. Violations of preventive bonds rose from 85 cases in 2024 to 201 cases in 2025, and fines recovered through courts jumped from Rs 11,600 to Rs 23,66,200. The number of externed accused increased from 42 to 106, while detentions under the...
The Supreme Court of India on Friday considered a petition filed challenging a decision of the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court against feeding stray dogs in public spaces.
The High Court had issued various directions to the authorities concerning capturing, sheltering and feeding stray dogs. It also had directed that no citizen of Nagpur and areas surrounding it shall feed or make any attempt to feed stray dogs in public places, gardens etc. It also directed the Municipal Commissioner to ensure no such feeding at any place except the own homes of such persons. The HC had also directed the concerned authorities under Section 44 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 to detain all stray dogs wandering in the public streets.
In the Apex Court, a bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice J K Maheshwari refused to pass an interim order that no coercive steps in pursuance of the High Court order should be taken in the meanwhile.
“The order is an omnibus direction which may require some modification. If stray dogs are not fed, they will become more aggressive. We need to have the assistance of the Municipal Corporation. At the same time, there has to be checks,” Justice Khanna orally remarked during the hearing. He also remarked that the portion of the order that prohibits feeding dogs altogether unless adopted needs to be changed. “Adoption should not mean that the stray dogs will have to be brought to the homes of the feeders,” Justice Khanna orally said.
The bench listed the matter next on November 16 and directed the petitioners to serve the copies on the Nagpur Municipal Corporation and the Animal Welfare Board. However, the Bench refused to grant interim relief and directed that coercive steps would be taken against people found to violate the HC order till the next date.
The Petitioners alleged that these directions not only adversely affect the rights of street dogs, care-givers but are also contrary to both statutory provisions as well as the orders of the supreme court.
The plea in the Apex Court highlights that there was no legislation which prohibits feeding of stray dogs or otherwise makes it a penal offence and thus contends to direct statutory authorities to act contrary to law.
It states that blanket direction for detention of stray dogs is illegal as per the rule 7 of Animal Birth Control Rules make it abundantly clear that capturing/detention of dogs shall be based on “Specific complaints” about nuisance or dog bite.
The petition refers to the Supreme Court’s decision in Animal Welfare Board of India Vs A. Nagaraja which recognized that animals’ right to life and dignity and the right to get protection from human beings. The caveat filed by Vijay Talewar. Adv Shakul Ghatole appeared in the Supreme Court for the petitioner.
Comments
Post a Comment