CHENNAI, SEPTEMBER 15: The Madras High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a man accused of allegedly throwing a stone at a neighbour’s pet dog, ruling that the police had acted without following the mandatory legal procedure required for investigating a non-cognizable offence.
Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, while hearing the matter, observed that the alleged offence under Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, is non-cognizable in nature. Consequently, the police were required to secure prior permission from the jurisdictional Magistrate before registering and investigating the case.
The Court noted that the dispute involved two neighbours who were already having previous differences. During the proceedings, it emerged that the accused had earlier approached the police with a complaint alleging that the complainant had made the dog attack and bite him.
The accused’s version was supported by medical documents and photographs, which had been placed before the Court.
Against this background, the High Court observed that the subsequent animal cruelty complaint appeared to have been filed as a “counter blast” to the earlier complaint lodged by the accused.
The Court also took note of the absence of material establishing that the dog had actually sustained any injury because of the alleged stone-pelting incident.
A significant issue before the Court was the manner in which the criminal case had been initiated. The Court found that the police had proceeded to register the FIR, conduct the investigation and submit the final report without first obtaining the required permission of the competent court.
Since the alleged offence was non-cognizable, the statutory procedure could not have been bypassed, the Court held.
The High Court concluded that continuation of the criminal proceedings, despite the failure to obtain the mandatory judicial permission, would amount to a “clear abuse of the process of law.”
Accordingly, the Madras High Court exercised its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tambaram, bringing an end to the case against the accused.
The ruling reiterates that police authorities must strictly comply with the procedural safeguards governing investigation of non-cognizable offences, even in cases involving allegations of animal cruelty.
