Stray Dog Case : Supreme Court Hears Parents Of 6-Year Old Whose Death Triggered Suo Motu Case

In the Stray Dogs case, parents of the minor victim whose death led the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognizance, made arguments today.A newspaper article in the Times of India about the 6-year old's death, “In a city hounded by strays, kids pay the price”, led the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognizance of the issue last August.They informed the Court today that hospitals were guilty of negligence in the matter as they refused timely treatment.Raising this argument, the parents sought an enquiry. Though some counsels attempted to contest the victim's cause of death, arguing that the death of the minor was not due to rabies, the Court shunned them from commenting on the case.A bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjaria heard the matter.It may be recalled that the suo motu case was trigged by a news report on the death of 6-year old Chavi Sharma, who was attacked and bitten several times by a stray dog in Pooth Kalan, Delhi. The victim was administered 3 doses of rabies vaccine, but tragically, passed away, Allegedly, she was referred from hospital to hospital, but most of them refused treatment or admission. In this backdrop, Advocate Jasdeep Dhillon, for the deceased victim's parents, told the Court today that hospitals were negligent in handling the case and there must be an enquiry. He informed that the victim obtained shots of rabies vaccine at Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini, but when she was referred to other hospitals for treatment (of injuries, etc.), they declined to admit or treat her. Among these hospitals were Safdarjung Hospital, Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital and Lady Hardinge Hospital.He also stated that the dog that bit the victim had previously bitten 4 other people in the area, but no remedial action was taken by the authorities. In response to a Court query on the cause of death, he replied it was a case of acute viral post dog bite.Some counsels, from the dog lovers' side, attempted to contest the cause of the victim's death, pointing out that the post mortem report was not conclusive, as in order to confirm rabies, brain tissue has to be analyzed. One of the counsels also claimed that the victim was eating and drinking in her final days, which was not possible if she had rabies.Coming down strongly on the counsels, the bench prohibited any such arguments. "You're trying to suggest her death was due to natural causes?" exclaimed Justice Mehta. Later, both Justices Nath and Mehta stopped all counsels from commenting on Chavi's case.Besides Dhillon, another counsel who appeared for a dog bite victim submitted that there is no one to take responsibility of a stray dog that bites repeatedly. He further urged that since animals like buffaloes etc. are killed for human consumption, stray dogs, which are violent per se, are liable to be killed. Case Title: In Re : 'City Hounded By Strays, Kids Pay Price', SMW(C) No. 5/2025 (and connected cases)Click Here To Read/Download Order

Stray Dog Case : Supreme Court Hears Parents Of 6-Year Old Whose Death Triggered Suo Motu Case

Debby Jain

The Court came down heavily on some lawyers who denied that the child's death was due to rabies.

Tags