Not Mandatory To Muzzle Pet Dogs In Public Places, Only Leashing Mandatory: Chennai Civic Body Tells Madras High Court

The Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC), on Tuesday (25th November), informed the Madras High Court that muzzling of pet dogs has not been made mandatory in the city and that no penalty would be imposed on the pet owners for not muzzling the dogs in public places. Making submissions before Justice V Lakshminarayanan, Advocate Arun Babu submitted that the GCC had only issued an advisory asking pet owners to muzzle their dogs and that the same had not been made mandatory. The counsel, however, informed that pet dog owners need to leash their dogs in public places, and a fine of Rs 500 would be imposed if the same is not complied with. The submissions were made during the hearing of a petition filed by an NGO, People for Cattle in India, challenging the GCC's announcement wherein the GCC had made it mandatory to obtain a license for pets and had kept a cut-off date of November 24, 2025, for obtaining the license, failing which a fine of Rs. 5,000 was to be imposed. Through the communication, the GCC also restricted the number of pets that can be owned by persons to 4, and allegedly made it compulsory for pet owners to muzzle their dogs when in public. The NGO challenged these communications by the GCC and called for framing humane, proportionate and evidence-based regulations. The NGO pointed out possible difficulties in muzzling certain dogs. The NGO also pointed out that the communication did not provide any exemption for foster care providers or rehabilitative custodians. When the case was taken up for hearing today, the GCC counsel informed the court that muzzling of dogs has not been made mandatory and only mandate was to leash the dogs, for public safety. The GCC also informed the court that the deadline for licensing pets has been extended to December 7, 2025. With respect to the number of pets that could be owned by persons, the GCC informed that the restriction has been removed now and presently there was no restriction on the number of pets that could be owned by a person. With respect to the foster homes/NGOs, the GCC informed the court that the institutions could obtain license for the pets available with them, which could be transferred to the adoptive parents in the future. Noting that the clarification addresses the grievances raised by the petitioner NGO, the court closed the plea. Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. B. Prashanth Nadaraj Counsel for Respondents: Mr. A. Arun Babu, Mr. V. Chandra Sekaran Case Title: People for Cattle in India v. The Commissioner, GCC and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 440 Case No: WP No. 44107 of 2025

Not Mandatory To Muzzle Pet Dogs In Public Places, Only Leashing Mandatory: Chennai Civic Body Tells Madras High Court

Upasana Sajeev

Tags