The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a mentioning of a plea seeking action against Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann for his alleged controversial statement on stray dogs. A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra declined to hear the matter, stating that the plea was not listed and the mentioning was not proper.
Background of the Case
The plea, filed by an animal rights activist, alleged that Mann's statement during a public event in March 2023 incited violence against stray dogs. The activist claimed that the CM's remarks led to an increase in attacks on stray dogs in the state. However, the Supreme Court bench observed that the matter required proper listing and could not be taken up through mentioning.
Court's Observations
The Chief Justice remarked that the court cannot entertain every plea through mentioning, especially when it involves a high constitutional functionary like a Chief Minister. The bench advised the petitioner to approach the court through regular filing procedures. The court also noted that the issue of stray dogs is a sensitive matter that needs to be addressed through appropriate legal channels.
Previous Incidents
This is not the first time the Supreme Court has dealt with stray dog-related cases. In 2023, the court had issued guidelines for the management of stray dogs, emphasizing sterilization and vaccination. The court had also directed states to form committees to address the issue. However, the current plea specifically targeted the Punjab CM's statement, which the petitioner claimed violated the Animal Welfare Act.
Reactions and Responses
The Punjab government has not yet officially responded to the plea. However, sources close to the CM's office have dismissed the allegations, stating that Mann's remarks were taken out of context. Animal rights groups have expressed disappointment over the court's refusal to hear the matter, vowing to pursue the case through proper legal procedures.
The Supreme Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural norms in filing petitions. The matter is likely to be heard again if filed through the correct channel.
