Despite Proof Against the Man Who Abused a Dog, Law Failed Us

We saw a man in an obscene act with a dog and the legal system has failed to provide justice.

Published
My Report
5 min read
Despite Proof Against the Man Who Abused a Dog, Law Failed Us

At about 1:30 am, a few friends and I finished a friend’s birthday party and were chit-chatting on our house terrace. At that time, we noticed a fellow on the road with a dog. Initially, it didn’t look very suspicious.

Soon, we realised that he started doing inappropriate things to the dog behind a car. We were disgusted by what we saw. We instantly knew we had to report this and wanted enough evidence to hold him responsible for this horrendous act. We waited for a few more minutes to get the CCTV camera footage. This happened outside a hospital in Nandanam Extension.

I felt that if we could get it on video I could have a case him filed under Section 377, because I am well aware of the loopholes.

Just then the 22-year-old man began to touch the dog inappropriately and began stroking it.

The man continued till a point where he couldn’t do anything more to its genitals. The dog was trying to move away from him and finally managed. Then it ran way. It seemed that the man was not satisfied and we saw him waiting for the dog.

That's when a couple of my friends and I followed him and warned him. I was not okay with just letting go with a warning. I wanted some kind of action to be taken against the man. But it seemed like the man didn’t really care.

When my friends asked him about his deed he readily agreed and said, ‘Yes. I did it.’

A 22-year-old man was seen sexually abusing a stray dog in Chennai.
A 22-year-old man was seen sexually abusing a stray dog in Chennai.
(Photo Courtesy: CCTV Screengrab)

Suddenly we were all overwhelmed with fear that this was not the first time such an incident had occurred in our area. We have noticed that this man used to loiter around, all by himself, in the area late at night.

Many residents are scared and believe that “today he did this to a dog, tomorrow it could be a child!’. But police failed to understand our concern. 

When he went to file a police complaint it took us more than a day, as we were struggling to lodge a complaint under the right sections.

We wanted to get this case filed under Section 377 but that was not possible. In the video, you can see that this is a case of unnatural sex.

The accused man works at a tea shop nearby. The owner of the tea shop is well connected with high-profile politicians.

They (police) were using all arguments to establish that this fails to make a case. In fact, they mentally harassed the witnesses by saying, ‘You guys have a job then why are you getting involved in all this. You will need to come to the court.’ But we were determined and we said, ‘We want to file this case and that’s why we are here.’

  • Copy of the FIR report against the man who was seen sexually abusing a dog.
  • The residents believe the sections he has been charged with are not strong enough to hold a good case against him.

In fact, I have lodged complaints regarding animal abuse before too.

I’ve noticed that the general attitude amongst police is a bit lethargic because animals are treated only as inanimate objects.

Guess what was the police’s initial reaction after watching the video? They said it looked like the man was just petting the dog.

By the way, when we had caught the man, as far as we could tell, he was not drunk or drugged.

When someone is doing this in their right state of mind, it is very dangerous. I don’t understand, why the police is backing such a man?

We gave a clear statement, explaining the sequence of events and under which section the case should be filed. But they were trying to dilute our case by saying, “Let’s just call it ‘obscene acts’ and that’s enough.”

We also wanted it to be filed under Section 294, but that too didn't happen.

Sai Vignesh, an animal activist and founder of Almighty Animal Care Trust, helped us file the case and ensured that the FIR was filed.

Dog sexually abused at Nandanam, Chennai. Yesterday morning, we received a call from Meenachi Sundaram, an animal...

Posted by Almighty Animal Care Trust on Wednesday, February 27, 2019

The police went on to say that they end up seeing more obscene scenes when they go for night patrol and that this is nothing compared to that.

It is disturbing how these cops ignore a case that involves living things.

The fact is that the problem doesn’t lie with the police but with our legal system. Section 377 should include those who sexually abuse, and not just rape. Such men who are a threat to the society should be arrested under non-bailable sections.

Even if we can’t completely stop such incidents from happening, at least we will have the security that this guy will not come back to cause more trouble.

As told to Smitha TK

What Did the Police Say?

The Quint spoke to the Inspector in-charge, who said that the FIR was filed on 27 February, and the accused has been remanded.

“The case has been filed under Section 429 IPC, 11 (1) K Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960. We can’t file under other sections because they don’t apply for animals. We can’t file under Section 377 as the man in the video was caught in an act of non-penetrative sex with the dog. The animal activist and others were just exaggerating the issue to sensationalise the matter,” said the inspector on Wednesday.

However Sai, the animal activist, told us that the man was out on bail the same night.

We couldn’t reach the police to confirm this. The article would be updated as soon as we have a police confirmation.

Section 429 in the Indian Penal Code states that 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.

Section 11 (1) K in The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 holds those accountable who offer 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.

(All 'My Report' branded stories are submitted by citizen journalists to The Quint. ThoughThe Quint inquires into the claims/allegations from all parties before publishing, the report and the views expressed above are the citizen journalist's own. The Quint neither endorses, nor is responsible for the same.)

(The Quint is available on Telegram. For handpicked stories every day, subscribe to us on Telegram)

Stay Updated

Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter And Get News Delivered Straight To Your Inbox.

Join over 120,000 subscribers!