On 30th August, Supreme Court Justice Vikram Nath remarked that while he had been known in the legal fraternity for his judicial work, it was the stray dog matter that gave him recognition worldwide. Justice Nath was speaking at a regional conference on human-wildlife conflict in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, which was organised by NALSA and KeLSA. He expressed gratitude to the Chief Justice of India for assigning him the matter.
He said, “So far, I have been known in the legal fraternity for the little work I do, but I am thankful to the stray dogs case for making me known to the entire civil society, not only in this country but world over. And I am thankful to my CJI for allotting me that matter.”
Acknowledges dog lovers’ support
Justice Nath pointed out that presidents of various lawyers’ associations, both in India and abroad, now ask him about the ‘stray dogs’ matter. Interestingly, he added that along with human blessings, he was also receiving good wishes from dogs themselves. He said, “Apart from dog lovers, dogs are also giving me blessings and good wishes,” which somewhat shows his biased leaning.
The remark comes in the backdrop of mobilisation of self-styled dog lovers and activists who had protested after a bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan ordered to round up and keep all the dogs in shelters in Delhi-NCR. Following the protests and repeated mentions in front of the Chief Justice of India, the matter was curiously reassigned to a three-judge bench within days. The new bench, led by Justice Nath, modified the order on 22nd August and said that the dogs must be released back after deworming, vaccination and sterilisation. Only the aggressive and rabid dogs will be kept in shelters.
While the Court categorically banned public feeding, self-styled dog lovers and some NGOs are claiming that till Municipal Corporations designate feeding spots, public feeding can continue, which is a false interpretation of the court order.
Bench reshuffle and bias concerns
The case was transferred to Justice Nath’s bench after the CJI’s intervention. However, with the presiding judge himself acknowledging the appreciation he has been receiving from “dog lovers”, questions are being raised over whether such visible support may end up casting a shadow on how unbiased the hearing of this contentious public safety issue will be.
