Punishing all men for the crime of one rapist is absurd. It defies reason
law and morality. No civilised society operates on the presumption that
everyone must pay for the sins of one. Yet when it comes to stray dogs our
system suddenly abandons this principle. For a single rabid dog the entire
stray population is rounded up confined and treated as if they were criminals.
This is not justice it is collective punishment and it reeks of barbaric
governance.
At the heart of our Constitution lies Article 14 the guarantee of equality
before law and equal protection of laws. Collective punishment destroys this
principle. You punish the guilty party not an entire category of beings. This
is why even the most draconian laws in India from UAPA to MCOCA still require
individual culpability to be established before detention. Mass impounding of
stray dogs for a single rabies incident is a naked violation of this principle.
It is not reasonable classification under Article 14 it is arbitrary action and
arbitrariness is the sworn enemy of constitutional governance.
Our courts have repeatedly held that presumption of guilt based solely on
association is unconstitutional. Whether in State of West Bengal v Anwar Ali
Sarkar 1952 or Maneka Gandhi v Union of India 1978 the Supreme Court has struck
down measures that sacrifice fairness for administrative convenience. Yet in
August 2025 the Court itself authorised precisely such an approach instructing
Delhi’s civic authorities to pick up all stray dogs rather than focus on
identifying and treating infected animals. It is jurisprudential hypocrisy
applying constitutional precision for human rights cases but adopting medieval
blanket measures for animals.
The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 criminalises the unnecessary
infliction of pain and suffering. Section 11 explicitly prohibits cruel
confinement. The Animal Birth Control Dogs Rules 2001 now replaced by the 2023
Rules mandate catch neuter vaccinate release as the sole method of stray dog
population and disease control. Nowhere do they authorise indiscriminate long
term detention of healthy vaccinated dogs. Further Article 51A g of the
Constitution casts a fundamental duty on every citizen to have compassion for
living creatures. This is not ornamental the Supreme Court in Animal Welfare
Board of India v A Nagaraja 2014 held that compassion for animals is a
constitutional ethos and cruelty cannot be justified by administrative ease. By
ordering blanket capture the authorities and by extension the Court are in
clear violation of statutory law constitutional duties and judicial precedent.
In State of Gujarat v Mirzapur Moti Kureshi 2005 the Supreme Court held
that animals have intrinsic value beyond human utility. If that is true then
their liberty like ours cannot be taken away except in accordance with law and
certainly not on the basis of fear mongering or administrative convenience.
Public health and safety are legitimate concerns but they must be pursued by
scientific proportionate measures not collective incarceration. The World
Health Organization itself endorses CNVR and mass vaccination not
indiscriminate capture as the only effective long term rabies control method.
This is not just a lapse of legal reasoning it is a reflection of a
political culture that thrives on scapegoating. The RSS BJP playbook is to find
an enemy whether a community a dissenting voice or even animals and showcase
state power through their subjugation. Just as bulldozers are used not for
justice but for televised intimidation mass dog captures are less about rabies
control and more about displaying control. It is politics masquerading as
public health with legality as collateral damage.
Law requires that administrative action be non arbitrary E P Royappa v
State of Tamil Nadu 1974 and proportionate to its objective Modern Dental
College v State of Madhya Pradesh 2016. Blanket capture fails both tests. If
governance were serious it would maintain updated vaccination records for
street dogs conduct area specific rabies testing quarantine only suspected or
infected animals and launch public awareness drives to reduce panic and
misinformation. Instead what we see is the round them all up approach quick
visible and legally indefensible.
When the law authorises cruelty against the innocent it legitimises cruelty
as a governance tool. This corrodes not just legal norms but moral ones. Gandhi
famously said The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by
the way its animals are treated. By that standard our legal system is
regressing. Sai Baba fed stray dogs. In Hindu mythology Bhairav is accompanied
by a dog. In Buddhism compassion for all beings is the first precept. By
sanctioning mass detention the state is not just breaking man made law it is
violating civilisational values.
Once you legitimise collective punishment in one sphere you pave the way
for its expansion. Today it is stray dogs. Tomorrow it could be protestors
journalists or minority communities. The legal precedent we can punish all for
the fault of one is dangerous in any democratic society. The same Article 14
that protects a citizen from arbitrary arrest should protect a stray dog from
arbitrary confinement. The same due process that prevents mass incarceration of
men must apply to voiceless animals. Justice without equality is no justice at
all.
Animal rights activists lawyers and ordinary citizens must challenge this
in every available forum from filing writ petitions to running public
campaigns. The state must be compelled to follow statutory compliance
constitutional mandates judicial precedent and scientific standards. This is
not just about animals it is about whether India will uphold law over laziness
compassion over cruelty and precision over prejudice.
Punishing all men for one rapist is absurd. Locking up every dog for one
rabies case is barbaric. Justice targets the guilty. Tyranny punishes the
innocent. Blanket crackdowns are the refuge of the lazy not the law.
#JusticeNotTyranny #StopCollectivePunishment #AnimalRights #RuleOfLaw
#CompassionIsStrength #Article14 #PCAAct
About the Author: Siddhartha Shankar
Mishra is an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India known for his sharp legal
commentary blending constitutional law with public conscience. His writings
often challenge judicial complacency and political hypocrisy while defending
the rights of the voiceless both human and animal.
No comments:
Post a Comment