Pet Rules in Housing Society: Rights and Responsibility of Pet Owners

Recent times have witnessed a rise in the number of urban and nuclear households choosing to adopt domesticated pets like cats and dogs in their homes in crowded housing societies in urban areas. This article intends to shed light on the resolution of conflicts between animal lovers/pet owners vs. other members of housing societies in which pets are kept vis-à-vis the laws governing the same. While most pet owners consider their dogs and cats as family members, they also have to ensure that their domesticated pets don’t cause a nuisance/harassment to others in their Housing Societies or neighbourhood.

Traditional Indian Society has always placed a high value on the compassionate treatment of animals. The father of the nation Mahatma Gandhi once said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”

What are the Pet Rules in Housing Societies?

Many housing societies have made rules for pets in society to be followed by their members who house their pets in their homes in such societies which regulate the housing of pets or feeding of strays within the society premises. There are however a few housing societies that are controlled by misguided and tyrannical Office Bearers or vociferous society members who vehemently oppose the keeping of pets in the homes of its members as well as the feeding of strays in and/or around their housing societies. This often leads to conflicts between pet/animal lovers and those that are against animals in general and pets in their building

Supreme Court Order on Pets in Apartments: The Supreme Court of India has even held and interpreted provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty Act and held that the “Right to live in a healthy and clean atmosphere and right to get protection from human beings against inflicting unnecessary pain or suffering is a right guaranteed to the animals” and our courts have championed this cause and upheld these in innumerable cases both reported as well as unreported. Animals' well-being and welfare have been statutorily recognised under not just various laws but also in the Constitution of India itself.

The Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) has even come out with a set of guidelines relating to pets as well as stray animals, however, these being guidelines are not mandatory and are not enforceable. While there are no specific laws dealing with the treatment of domesticated animals in housing societies, there are a number of laws in our legal framework that regulate and guide us in our treatment of animals, including Article 21 and Article 51 A (g) of the Constitution of India, The Indian Penal Code, Animal Birth Control Rules, Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, etc

Our Constitution protects life and the word "Life" has been given an expanded definition by our Courts to mean and include any disturbance from the basic environment of all forms of life, including animal life, within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution. In one case our Supreme Court has held "Life" to mean something more than mere survival or existence or instrumental value for human beings, but to lead a life with some intrinsic worth, honour and dignity.

• Under Clause (g) of Article 51A of the Constitution of India, it is the fundamental duty of every citizen of India “…to have compassion for living creatures” which means concern for their suffering, sympathy, kindness, etc.;
• Under Clause (h) of Article 51A of the Constitution of India provides that it shall be the duty of every citizen to develop humanism which includes sensibility for other species;
• The Uttarakhand High Court in a recent judgment declared animals to be juristic persons and were accorded the status of legal persons or entities by the court.
• The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA) and the rights framed thereunder statutorily recognize Animals’ well-being and welfare as well. The right to dignity and fair treatment is not confined to human beings alone, but to animals as well. The right to get food and shelter is also a right guaranteed under the said Act.

Temple Grandin and Catherine Johnson, in their work on “Animals in Translation” say the single worst thing you can do to an animal emotionally is to make it feel afraid.” The Supreme Court of India has even observed that “Animals also have a right against human beings not to be tortured and against the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering.” What is alarming, albeit not surprising is that research studies and data compiled from the Humane Society and other sources on Domestic Violence and Child Abuse cases reveal that a staggering number of animals are targeted by those who abuse their children or spouses. One of our state’s High Courts even went on to declare that all animals have honour and dignity and are entitled to legal rights. Humans are guardians of the animal kingdom and hence responsible for their welfare and healthcare.

Rules for Pet Dogs in Society

Our Courts have observed that the penalty for contravention of these animal welfare and protection laws is often not commensurate with the gravity of the offence. The Consumer Court in Thane (Maharashtra) recently ruled in favour of a resident who complained that the Co-op Society in which he resided had passed a resolution preventing dogs from making use of the building’s lifts. In that specific case the society had claimed dog was not a consumer and its usage of the lift could result in the spread of diseases and hence they should be disallowed from using the society’s facilities. To this, the Court declared that the Complainant (owner) being a member of the Co-op housing society, was a consumer and he was well within his rights to bring his complaint before the Consumer Court and was eligible for getting compensation for the mental agony and harassment caused by the society.

In another case, the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in deciding a Complaint in favour of a person who was charged Rs. 500 per month for each of his dogs to use the lift in his building, The Forum held that pets being members of the modern, urban family no charge can be levied on him for the use of the lift for his dogs. The Forum observed that when several types of “outsiders” such as vegetable vendors, delivery men, etc. use the building infrastructure and the elevators/lifts in particular on a regular basis and held that the society’s decision to levy charges on residents’ pets for elevators/lifts usage was inappropriate. Not allowing pet owners to use the lift (especially, in cases of buildings having only one lift) with their pets, or other common amenities such as gardens and parks in the society, penalising the pet owners for the noise of any sort including barking, discriminating pet dogs on the basis of their breed and size have been held to be unjustified by our Courts.

Even if the majority of the members of a Society want to ban/remove a pet owner or an adopted domesticated pet animal they cannot arbitrarily do so. Recently, a Housing Society had imposed a fine of Rs. 2,500 per day on an individual for feeding stray dogs inside the housing society premises. The Housing Society claimed that its premises were littered with dog poop and that the dogs were aggressive, barking at senior citizens and children and that several of its members had been attacked by female dogs after giving birth. They claimed that a majority of its society members had passed this resolution to levy fines for feeding dogs within the society premises. In this case, the Deputy Registrar of Housing Societies ordered the housing society to reverse its decision of fining its member for feeding stray dogs, and even asked the housing society to seek guidance from the AWBI as far as feeding stray animals was concerned.

However, while there are laws in place to protect domesticated animals and animal lovers, there are also certain precautions a pet owner needs to take, such as mandatory vaccinations for their domesticated pets, cleaning up after their pets, disposing of their pets’ waste, keeping their pets on a leash in common areas such as gardens, passages and other such safeguards to prevent pets from attacking residents, especially children. Some cities have also even framed laws for licensing of pets. According to Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act 1888, Section 191A all the pet owners in Mumbai should have a valid license for their pet as a tax on pet owners is collected accordingly.

Responsibilities of Pet Owners in Housing Societies

The BAF (Bangalore Apartments Federation) advises keeping the rules and bylaws of an apartment complex straightforward when it comes to pet ownership. The following provisions on pet ownership could be found in an apartment association's bylaws:

Pet owners are required to keep their animals on a leash and in the company of the owner or caretaker while they are outside their home. If a resident's pet accidentally relieves itself in a shared space, they are required to clean up the area right afterwards. Residents with pets must make sure that their animals receive routine vaccinations and follow all BBMP regulations.

BAF advises against establishing any further regulations governing pet ownership in apartments.

In conclusion, Interpretation of the prevailing laws does not just deal with pet owners and animal lovers but also provide for punishment to any persons obstructing or attempting to harm these pet/animals and/or their caretakers/guardians.

Some Relevant Sections of Housing Society Rules for Pets

Constitution of India

• 21: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
• 51A. It shall be the duty of every citizen of India - "(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures."

The Indian Penal Code

428: Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees. Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless. +any animal or animals of the value of ten rupees or upwards shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

429: Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees. Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, or any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.

Animal Birth Control Rules 2001

No sterilised dogs can be relocated from their area. If a dog is not sterilised, the housing society can ask an animal welfare organization to sterilise and vaccinate it, but they cannot relocate them.

Pet Laws in India

The advice is being given in accordance with "Section 9(k) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960," which makes it illegal for housing societies to establish pet bye rules that forbid pets, even with the support of a majority of the society's residents. Every citizen has a responsibility to have compassion for animals and all other living things, according to article 51 A (g).

There may be no discrimination: A housing society cannot prohibit dogs or pets based on the breed or size of the animal. Even dog barking concerns cannot be used as justification for a pet prohibition.

Use of common areas: A housing society cannot prohibit a pet from using common areas, such as elevators and parks, or charge a fine or additional fee for doing so.

Cruelty is punishable: Dog harassment rules cannot be made by society. The "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act" makes it illegal to treat stray animals cruelly. Additionally, it is a crime that is sanctioned by Sections 428 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code.

No resident may be prohibited from feeding stray dogs or cats in the neighbourhood.

Animals protected by law: The "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act" prohibits the training or use of some animals, including bears, monkeys, and parakeets, for entertainment purposes. The majority of rodents and reptiles are likewise forbidden by this law.

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act

Section 3. Duties of persons having charge of animals: It shall be the duty of every person having the care or charge of any animal to take all reasonable measures to ensure the well-being of such animal and to prevent the infliction upon such animal of unnecessary pain or suffering.”

Section 11. Treating animals cruelly:

(1) If any person

(a) beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering or causes or, being the owner permits, any animals to be so treated; or

(b) 13 [employs in any work or labour or for any purpose any animal which, by reason of its age or any disease], infirmity, wound, sore or other cause, is unfit to be so employed or, being the owner, permits any such unfit animal to be so employed; or

(c) wilfully and unreasonably administers any injurious drug or injurious substance to 14 [any animal] or wilfully and unreasonably causes or attempts to cause any such drug or substance to be taken by 14 [any animal]; or

(d) conveys or carries, whether in or upon any vehicle or not, any animal in such a manner or position as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering; or

(e) keeps or confines any animal in any cage or other receptacle which does not measure sufficiently in height, length and breadth to permit the animal a reasonable opportunity for movement; or

g) being the owner, neglects to exercise or cause to be exercised reasonably any dog habitually chained up or kept in close confinement; or

(h) being the owner of 15 [any animal], fails to provide such animal with sufficient food, drink or shelter; or

(i) without reasonable cause, abandons any animal in circumstances which render it likely that it will suffer pain by reason of starvation or thirst; or

(j) wilfully permits any animal, of which he is the owner to go at large in any street while the animal is affected with contagious or infectious disease or, without reasonable excuse permits any diseased or disabled animal, of which he is the owner, to die in any street; or

(k) offers for sale or, without reasonable cause, has in his possession any animal which is suffering pain by reason of mutilation, starvation, thirst, overcrowding or other ill-treatment; or

16 [(l) mutilates any animal or kills any animal (including stray dogs) by using the method of strychnine injections in the heart or in any other unnecessarily cruel manner; or;] 17 [m) solely with a view to providing entertainment

(i) confines or causes to be confined any animal (including the tying of an animal as a bait in a tiger or other sanctuary) so as to make it an object of prey for any other animal; or

(ii) incites any animal to fight or bait any other animal; or]

(n) 18 [***] organises, keeps, uses or acts in the management of, any place for animal fighting or for the purpose of baiting any animal or permits or offers any place to be so used or receives money for the admission of any other person to any place kept or used for any such purposes; or

(o) promotes or takes part in any shooting match or competition wherein animals are released from captivity for the purpose of such shooting; he shall be punishable, 19 [in the case of a first offence, with fine which shall not be less than ten rupees but which may extend to fifty rupees, and in the case of a second or subsequent offence committed within three years of the previous offence, with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees but which may extend to one hundred rupees or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with both.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an owner shall be deemed to have committed an offence if he has failed to exercise reasonable care and supervision with a view to the prevention of such offence: Provided that where an owner is convicted of permitting cruelty by reason only of having failed to exercise such care and supervision, he shall not be liable to imprisonment without the option of a fine.”

Read: The Concept of Ancestral Property Acquisition Broken Down

Sources:

• The Constitution of India
• Indian Penal Code, 1860
• Animal Birth Control Rules, 2001
• Animal Welfare Board of India – Guidelines dated 26th February 2015
• Animal Welfare Board of India –Letter dated 30-6-2015 bearing No.9-1/2015-16 PCA
• Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja
• Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee, Amritsar v. Shri Som Nath Dass & ors. (Supreme Court of India (J.J.: A.P.Misra, M.Jagannadha Rao) Date of Judgment: 29/03/2000) Civil Appeal No. 5387 OF 2014 (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11686 of 2007)
• Narayan Dutt Bhatt v Union of India & Others (Writ Petition (PIL) No. 43 of 2014 (Uttarakhand High Court of Uttarakhand)
• Sierra Club v. Morton, Sec. Int. (United States Supreme Court; Justice Douglas’ dissenting opinion)
• Karnail Singh & Ors v/s State of Haryana (Punjab & Haryana High Court) (CRR-533-2013)
• Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972) (U.S. Supreme Court)
• Humane Society of the United States (Online edition)
• The New York Times Magazine (Online edition)

You can also check Nobroker for great deals and save thousands on brokerage.