Madras High Court questions man for unleashing pet dog against college students

The Madras High Court has imposed stringent conditions on a man from Salem district for grant of anticipatory bail in a case booked against him for having allegedly unleashed his pet dog against three female college students when they had gone to take a look at his neighbour’s house for rent.

Justice G. Jayachandran directed the petitioner S. Dhamodharan of Sooramangalam in Salem district to stay in Erode district for 30 days and report before the Pallipalayam police twice every day besides executing a bond for ₹10,000 along with two sureties for an equal sum.

The judge also ordered that after complying with the condition to stay in Erode and reporting before the local police once in the morning and again in the evening for 30 days, the petitioner must appear before the investigating officer at Sooramangalam police station as and when required.

According to the prosecution, the three college students had gone to Kasakaranur in Sooramangalam to take a look at a house for rent. Then, the petitioner, a neighbour, had unleashed the pet dog against them. Terrified, the women took to their heels and ended up falling into a nearby sewer.

The students also sustained injuries during the incident. Angered over the conduct of the petitioner, the landlord had questioned the dog owner but ended up being abused in filthy words and also threated of dire consequences leading to the lodging of the police complaint.

Acting on the basis of the landlord’s complaint, the Sooramangalam police had registered a First Information Report (FIR) against the petitioner under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act of 1998.

Fearing that he might get arrested in the case, the petitioner had rushed to the High Court seeking anticipatory bail. During the course of arguments on the advance bail plea, the petitioner’s counsel claimed that the college students had fallen into the sewer accidentally but the incident had been exaggerated by the police in order to register a criminal case against his client.

Refuting the claim, an Additional Public Prosecutor asserted that the petitioner had intentionally unleashed the dog against the college students who fell into the sewer and sustained injuries on being terrified by the ferociousness of the pet dog.

“What kind of behaviour is this? How can you unleash a dog against others?” the judge asked the petitioner’s counsel and granted advance bail with stringent conditions.