Calcutta High Court Emphasizes Pet Owners’ Duty to Prevent Harm Under Section 289 IPC
On May 28, 2025, the Calcutta High Court, presided over by Justice Uday Kumar, underscored the responsibility of pet owners to ensure their animals do not pose a probable danger to human life. The Court emphasized that under Section 289 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), liability arises from either actual knowledge of an animal’s dangerous tendencies or a failure to exercise due care in its management.
Case Background:
The case involved a revision application seeking to quash a criminal proceeding under Sections 289 and 34 of the IPC. The complainant alleged that on June 26, 2022, while on the roof of his residential building in Deeshari Megacity, Block 14, he was attacked by 10 to 12 unchained pet dogs, causing him to lose balance, fall, and sustain injuries.
Petitioner’s Arguments:
The petitioner contended that he owned only one dog, challenging the complainant’s claim of being attacked by multiple dogs. He further argued that the injury report dated June 26, 2022, noted “No obvious external injury seen,” and although X-rays were advised for pain in the wrist and shoulder, no such reports were submitted. This absence, he claimed, questioned the credibility of the injury claim, a key element for invoking Section 289 IPC.
Court’s Observations:
Justice Kumar observed that the core of the offence under Section 289 IPC is “negligent conduct with respect to animal” and the “probable danger” it may cause, not necessarily the actual manifestation of a grievous injury at the initial stage. The Court emphasized that pet owners must take adequate measures to prevent any harm, given the serious risk posed by dog attacks.
Conclusion:
The Calcutta High Court’s ruling reinforces the legal obligation of pet owners to exercise due diligence in managing their animals, ensuring they do not pose a threat to others. Negligence in this regard can attract criminal liability under Section 289 IPC, even in the absence of visible injuries.