Court Highlights Non-Cognizable Nature of Offence Under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and Emphasizes Need for Prior Judicial Permission Before FIR Registration
In a significant judgment dated September 1, 2026, the Madras High Court, presided over by Mr. Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, quashed criminal proceedings initiated against Balaji under Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960. The case arose from allegations that Balaji pelted stones at a pet dog belonging to his neighbor, which allegedly constituted cruelty to the animal.
The Court examined the facts and found that the petitioner and the complainant neighbor had a history of enmity. Evidence showed that the dog had actually bitten Balaji, causing severe injuries, and Balaji had lodged a complaint supported by medical records against the neighbor under Section 291 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. The Court observed that the criminal proceedings initiated against Balaji appeared to be a counterblast to his complaint.
Critically, the Court noted that the offence under Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act is a non-cognizable offence with a maximum penalty of a fine ranging from Rs. 10 to Rs. 50. As per Section 31 of the Act and procedural mandates, registration of an FIR for such non-cognizable offences requires prior permission from the jurisdictional court, which was not obtained in this case. The police had registered the FIR and completed the investigation without this mandatory approval, and the trial court had mechanically taken cognizance without scrutiny.
Further, the Court underscored that no evidence was produced to establish that the dog suffered any injury from the alleged pelting of stones. Given the absence of such proof and the procedural irregularities, the Court held that the proceedings amounted to an abuse of the legal process.
In light of these considerations, the Madras High Court allowed the Criminal Original Petition and quashed the proceedings pending as STC No. 1890 of 2025 before the Judicial Magistrate No. I, Tambaram. This judgment reiterates the procedural safeguards in place for non-cognizable offences under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and protects individuals from vexatious litigation arising out of neighborly disputes.
Bottom Line:
Proceedings under Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 quashed as the offence is non-cognizable, and registration of FIR without prior permission from the jurisdictional court was impermissible.
Statutory provision(s):
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 Section 11(1)(a), Section 31; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 291; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 174(2)
