The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday, April 10, overturned a circular issued by the Central government banning 23 breeds of 'ferocious dogs which are dangerous for human life.' Union of India could not have passed a blanket ban without constituting a proper committee, hearing stakeholders, said the court in its order.
A single-judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna struck down the circular while also stating that the Central government is at liberty to issue a fresh circular after proper consultation and by following proper procedure.
High Court Quashes Circular
The joint petition was moved by a professional dog handler and the owner of a Rottweiler, who alleged that the Expert Committee whose recommendation led to the circular, had not consulted any stakeholder before the decision.
The Centre, led by PM Narendra Modi, had asked all States and Union Territories (UTs) to ban 23 breeds of 'ferocious dogs which are dangerous for human life'. This comes after the Central government assured the Delhi High Court in December 2023 that it would expeditiously decide on the demand for a ban on licences to keep dangerous dog breeds.
Also Read | Pitbull, Rottweiler Ban : Centre Directs States to Ban 23 Ferocious Dogs Citing Threat to Human Life.
An Expert Committee suggested that the following dog breeds as ferocious and dangerous to human life:
1. Pitbull Terrier
2. Tosa Inu
3. American Staffordshire Terrier
4. Fila Brasileiro
5. Dogo Argentino
6. American Bulldog
7. Boerboel
8. Kangal
9. Central Asian Shepherd Dog (Ovcharka)
10. Caucasian Shepherd Dog (Ovcharka)
11. South Russian Shepherd Dog (Ovcharka)
12. Tornjak, Sarplaninac
13. Japanese Tosa,
14. Japanese Akita,
15. Mastiffs
16. Rottweiler
17. Terriers
18. Rhodesian Ridgeback
19. Wolf dogs
20. Canario Akbash dog
21. Moscow Guard dog
22. Cane Corso
23. Every dog of the type commonly known as Ban Dog (or Bandog).
The petitioners challenged the decision in the High Court, arguing that the circular was highly arbitrary, without jurisdiction and profoundly discriminatory in nature. The plea also argued that no particular dog breed can be identified as an aggressive breed. Any stand-alone incident of attack by the breed can be attributed only to the untrained and unsocialised dogs