 "Apart from increasing penalty, animal abuse needs to be made a non-bailable offence: Ambika Nijjar")
After a video recently went viral where two students at a suburban medical college in Chennai got together to throw a stray dog off the terrace, it allowed animal activists and the police to trace down the perpetrators. But the resulting legal action brought to light the fact that people can get away with cruelty against animals for a fine of Rs 50 and receive bail easily. People for Animals (PFA) is among the NGOs that launched the 'No More 50' campaign this year, which calls for amendments to the law against cruelty to animals. Ambika Nijjar, lawyer, animal rights activist, and legal advisor to PFA, speaks to Ranjita Ganesan about the challenges and ongoing efforts
Under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, anyone who beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise ill treats an animal can get away by paying a fine of between Rs 10 and Rs 50. Why is the fine so measly?
The law has not been amended in 56 years. In 1960, Rs 50 was a lot of money. Having to pay that much for being cruel to animals was commensurate with the seriousness of the crime- it taught someone a lesson. If you take the index of what it meant to people then, it would be around Rs 10,000 or more in today's terms. The same penalty has continued till date and it is becoming a joke. It is also an offence where you get bail immediately, simply for the asking of it.
The IPC Section 429 (killing, maiming or rendering useless animals of value including a horse), attracts up to five years in jail. How effective is it?
While these are cognizable offences, the accused are given immediate bail, and the fine at Rs 100 is paltry. The point to focus on here is that the penalty needs to be increased. According to the 2014 A Nagaraj case (which brought a ban on jallikattu), the Supreme Court has allocated freedom from cruelty and fear, both mental and physical, to animals. The law was progressive and changed the way animals were viewed because earlier, cattle were seen as a thing in one's ownership. We need an overhaul of the law where we don't see the value of animals in financial terms, but as living beings with a right to life.
How do our laws against cruelty to animals compare with international ones?
In the UK, they have an animal welfare law, with a level 4 (£2,500) or level 5 (£5,000) fine. In Canada, the fine for cruelty is $5,000. Offenders are also liable to imprisonment up to six months. In a developing country like Brazil, they get up to four years imprisonment for neglect, or abandonment. For cases of cockfighting, the term is six years. This was following protests in 2012 which asked for greater punishment. We are now taking up the issue of bird-fighting and cock-fighting in Indian courts too. Hopefully, the protests here too will lead to positive changes. Countries like the US collect data on such crimes systematically. We need to do that too.
In the recent incident, a dog was flung from the terrace by two Chennai medical students. Earlier puppies were killed in Bengaluru. How common are such cases of abuse?
In the Chennai case, the absolutely shocking thing is these guys were medical students. I hate to think of the fate of their patients in the future. I would not trust the healthcare of my children or parents with doctors who are capable of such depraved behaviour. There are various cases of puppy mills, and acid attacks on dogs too. The psychological condition of such offenders needs to be studied.
In this case of the medical students, there was a video and action was possible. How hard or easy is it to report when there is no immediate proof?
It depends on the police station, how sensitised the cops are. There have been instances where the police have immediately reacted. In India, I find the police have largely cooperated. They have given time to save animals. But their hands are also tied by the law. During rescues in Mumbai, the offender would get off with a Rs 50 fine. So sometimes when an activist goes to the police, they say we spend this much time finding a person, then the person will go to court and no matter how grave the harm, he will get bail within 15 minutes of going there. They are disheartened too.
Your suggestions for amendments to the law?
We are culturally a compassionate country, and animals are given some sort of status. Why not let that translate in the way we legislate and way we pass our laws? We need a change in the system where we recognise the connection between animals, the environment and society at large. The overwhelming body of scientific and psychological evidence shows that people who show cruelty or behave in such depraved manner towards animals do not stop there. They move to people. Internationally, even the FBI started tracking animal cruelty because all the murderers like Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer began with abusing animals. They found that these psychopaths would capture and kill animals and examine their insides, before killing men and women. There are studies in Chicago where victims of domestic violence reported that perpetrators also meted out neglect or abuse to their household pets. So apart from levying an increased penalty, the offence needs to be made non-bailable.
Have there been attempts by activists to secure an increase in fines- what has the response been?
The Supreme Court had stated in its 2014 jallikattu judgment that the penalty must be increased. Other high courts have also said the Rs 50 fine is very little. So courts have made observations about the fine being low but why Parliament has not done anything yet, the question has to be asked of Parliament. We started the 'No More 50' campaign some months ago and received support from every quarter.
Under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, anyone who beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise ill treats an animal can get away by paying a fine of between Rs 10 and Rs 50. Why is the fine so measly?
The law has not been amended in 56 years. In 1960, Rs 50 was a lot of money. Having to pay that much for being cruel to animals was commensurate with the seriousness of the crime- it taught someone a lesson. If you take the index of what it meant to people then, it would be around Rs 10,000 or more in today's terms. The same penalty has continued till date and it is becoming a joke. It is also an offence where you get bail immediately, simply for the asking of it.
More From This Section
While these are cognizable offences, the accused are given immediate bail, and the fine at Rs 100 is paltry. The point to focus on here is that the penalty needs to be increased. According to the 2014 A Nagaraj case (which brought a ban on jallikattu), the Supreme Court has allocated freedom from cruelty and fear, both mental and physical, to animals. The law was progressive and changed the way animals were viewed because earlier, cattle were seen as a thing in one's ownership. We need an overhaul of the law where we don't see the value of animals in financial terms, but as living beings with a right to life.
How do our laws against cruelty to animals compare with international ones?
In the UK, they have an animal welfare law, with a level 4 (£2,500) or level 5 (£5,000) fine. In Canada, the fine for cruelty is $5,000. Offenders are also liable to imprisonment up to six months. In a developing country like Brazil, they get up to four years imprisonment for neglect, or abandonment. For cases of cockfighting, the term is six years. This was following protests in 2012 which asked for greater punishment. We are now taking up the issue of bird-fighting and cock-fighting in Indian courts too. Hopefully, the protests here too will lead to positive changes. Countries like the US collect data on such crimes systematically. We need to do that too.
In the recent incident, a dog was flung from the terrace by two Chennai medical students. Earlier puppies were killed in Bengaluru. How common are such cases of abuse?
In the Chennai case, the absolutely shocking thing is these guys were medical students. I hate to think of the fate of their patients in the future. I would not trust the healthcare of my children or parents with doctors who are capable of such depraved behaviour. There are various cases of puppy mills, and acid attacks on dogs too. The psychological condition of such offenders needs to be studied.
In this case of the medical students, there was a video and action was possible. How hard or easy is it to report when there is no immediate proof?
It depends on the police station, how sensitised the cops are. There have been instances where the police have immediately reacted. In India, I find the police have largely cooperated. They have given time to save animals. But their hands are also tied by the law. During rescues in Mumbai, the offender would get off with a Rs 50 fine. So sometimes when an activist goes to the police, they say we spend this much time finding a person, then the person will go to court and no matter how grave the harm, he will get bail within 15 minutes of going there. They are disheartened too.
Your suggestions for amendments to the law?
We are culturally a compassionate country, and animals are given some sort of status. Why not let that translate in the way we legislate and way we pass our laws? We need a change in the system where we recognise the connection between animals, the environment and society at large. The overwhelming body of scientific and psychological evidence shows that people who show cruelty or behave in such depraved manner towards animals do not stop there. They move to people. Internationally, even the FBI started tracking animal cruelty because all the murderers like Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer began with abusing animals. They found that these psychopaths would capture and kill animals and examine their insides, before killing men and women. There are studies in Chicago where victims of domestic violence reported that perpetrators also meted out neglect or abuse to their household pets. So apart from levying an increased penalty, the offence needs to be made non-bailable.
Have there been attempts by activists to secure an increase in fines- what has the response been?
The Supreme Court had stated in its 2014 jallikattu judgment that the penalty must be increased. Other high courts have also said the Rs 50 fine is very little. So courts have made observations about the fine being low but why Parliament has not done anything yet, the question has to be asked of Parliament. We started the 'No More 50' campaign some months ago and received support from every quarter.