Delhi court pulls up animal shelter for defying order, seeks detailed report on seized dogs

A Delhi court has criticised the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre for failing to comply with a judicial order to hand over the custody of 10 dogs seized during an investigation, terming the explanation given by the centre “totally unsatisfactory” and “evasive”.

Additional Sessions Judge Surabhi Sharma Vats was hearing a criminal revision petition filed by the animal shelter challenging a magistrate court order directing it to release the dogs to the accused owner in an FIR registered at the Jagat Puri police station.

In the order dated January 13, the court said, “In light of the above, it is submitted that the revisionist’s (animal shelter) conduct demonstrates blatant non-compliance, gross negligence and deliberate misrepresentation, all while claiming to act for animal welfare. Their actions endanger life, violate statutory duties and constitute a misuse of their supposed authority.”

Also Read | Supreme Court orders removal of stray dogs from schools, hospitals, other public institutions

It said the Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre was not a guardian of animals, but a custodian in name only and further custody of dogs could only perpetuate risk to innocent, defenceless animals.

“A shelter or centre for animals or animal care claiming custody of thousands of animals is expected to maintain proper records, identification protocols, medical documentation and traceability, particularly in respect of animals taken into custody under the authority of law,” the judge said.

The court said that animals, birds and living beings are not inanimate objects, case property or disposable items and are entitled to life, dignity and proper care under the law.

“A perusal of the order dated December 24, 2025, reveals that submissions were made on behalf of the revisionist before the trial court that all 10 dogs were in their custody and none of them have been sold/adopted; that the animals were not in good health and requested to file update on the said dogs and that some of the dogs might have died during custody,” the court said.

“The statements made by the animal care shelter are extremely alarming, as they indicate gross lapses in supervision, medical care and accountability, raising serious concerns about the manner in which the revisionist has discharged its statutory duties,” it said.

It also directed the animal care centre to file a detailed, comprehensive and sworn status report on the next date of hearing, detailing all animals taken into custody, animals returned to owners, deaths during custody with veterinary records, adoptions or transfers, current status and location of each animal, and mechanisms for identification and record-keeping.