BNS | Stopping Person From Feeding Stray Dogs At Society Gate, School Bus Stop Not 'Wrongful Restraint': Bombay High Court

A person feeding stray dogs in crucial spots of a housing society like the entry/exit points, places where school bus stops etc. which are not 'designated spots' if stopped from feeding by other society members, cannot then file a complaint under section 126 (wrongful restraint) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS), held the Bombay High Court last week. A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Sandesh Patil quashed a First Information Report (FIR) lodged against one Ayyappa Swami, a resident of a society in Pune's Hinjewadi area, who was booked for allegedly restraining a group of young persons, who were feeding stray dogs at the society's entry/exit gate.The essence of Section 126 of the BNS is the voluntary obstruction of any person, so as to prevent a person from moving in any direction they have a legal right to proceed. This signifies that the person is immobilised from proceeding in any direction, the judges noted. "Feeding of the stray dogs in particular areas, more particularly, footpath, entry and exit points of the society and school bus stop, where the kids of the society board and alight of the school buses, is very crucial for the safety of the children and that obstructing from feeding the stray dogs in these areas cannot be said to be a voluntary obstruction within the meaning of Section 126 of the BNS," the judges held in the order pronounced on December 18. The judges noted from the statements of the witnesses that Ayyappa had only told the complainant and her friends that they were feeding the stray dogs at a non-designated spot which was not the feeding spot."We find, that obstructing a person from feeding stray dogs in a non-designated area and the area, where the school children board and alight school buses, as well as near the entry and exit points of the society, cannot be said to be 'wrongful restraint' within the meaning of Section 126 of the BNS," the judges opined, while further referring to the provisions of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 (ABC Rules) which provides for designated feeding area for the stray dogs. "In any event, stopping a person from wrongfully feeding the stray dogs in a non-designated area cannot be said to be restraint within the meaning of Section 126(1) of the BNS Act," the judges said. Further, the bench noted that the alleged obstruction was not for committing any illegal act, but for ensuring the safety of the children of the society, in light of the fact that about 40 incidents of dog attack/bites, had occurred in the society. "This was sufficient for the Applicant to prevent the complainant and her friends from feeding the stray dogs in the society. By no stretch of imagination, it can be stated that such an obstruction was illegal," the judges ruled. With these observations, the judges quashed the FIR lodged on January 24, 2025 against Ayyappa for allegedly wrongfully restraining the dog feeders. According to the FIR, the incident of 'wrongful restrain' took place on September 12, 2024 wherein the complaint along with her friends were feeding stray dogs in the society premises during school hours, specifically near the school bus pick up area and the entry/exit footpath of the society.On being told not to feed dogs at non-designated spots in the society, the complainant and the applicant entered into an altercation with the former abusing and threatening the latter. On the complaint of Ayyappa, the police only lodged a 'non-cognisable' complaint against the complainant in the instant case. When the petitioner issued a notice to her, she lodged the FIR against him after a period of nearly four months on January 24, 2025. The judges even considered this delay in lodging the FIR while quashing and setting aside the same. Appearance:Advocate Mohan Anant Vishnu appeared the Applicant.Additional Public Prosecutor Gauri Rao represented the State.Advocates Sumit Gadade and Shubham Gadade represented the Complainant. Case Title: Ayyappa Swami vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 343 of 2025)Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

BNS | Stopping Person From Feeding Stray Dogs At Society Gate, School Bus Stop Not 'Wrongful Restraint': Bombay High Court

Narsi Benwal

Tags