Delhi’s Tis Hazari Court has sentenced a man to one year of imprisonment for throwing acid on a dog, resulting in the loss of one eye of the animal.
The court said that the act shakes the conscience of the court and is bone-chilling. The incident dates back to 2020. An FIR was registered at Paharpur Ganj Police station.
While sentencing the convict, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Richa Sharma said, “The convict has committed an offence in a manner that shakes not only the conscience of this court but bone chilling as well.”
“The act of throwing some corrosive/burning substance, which resulted in the loss of one eye of the dog, is serious and grave. Letting off such a person with less punishment and granting any leniency to the convict will convey an adverse message to society,” ACJM Sharma said in the order passed on July 27.
“Life is as dear to a mute creature as it is to any human. A human being is expected to remember that his actions towards animals reflect humanity. It is our responsibility to be compassionate and kind to animals,” the court said.
It further said that the Court is reminded of a saying by Mahatma Gandhi, who said, “To my mind, the life of a lamb is no less precious than that of a human being. I should be unwilling to take the life of a lamb for the sake of the human body. I hold that the more helpless a creature, the more entitled it is to protection by man from the cruelty of man.”
The court also referred to Renowned German philosopher Emmanuel Kant, who once said, ‘He who is cruel to animals becomes hard in his dealings with men. We can judge the heart of man by his treatment to animals.’
The court has also imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 under Section 429 IPC and Rs. 50 under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
The court said that in default of payment of fine, convict shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months. On March 14, 2024, accused Mahendra Singh was convicted for offences under Section 429 of the IPC and under Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
The public prosecutor sought the maximum punishment for the convict. He submitted that the manner in which the offence is committed amounts to the highest order of cruelty to any living being, including any animal, and thus the convict does not deserve any leniency.
On the other hand, the defence counsel submitted in his arguments that the convict is a senior citizen of age 70 years and has a dependent wife of age 65 years.
It was further argued, that the son of the convict had suffered an accident nearly 10 years
Since then, his medical condition has not been good and therefore his son, his daughter-in-law and two grandchildren are also dependent on him.
“The convict is working as a hawker, as he suffered great losses during COVID and lockdown periods, and pursuant to that, his entire work collapsed. Since then, in order to sustain himself, he has been running a hawker stall with the assistance of his son and somehow managing to make ends meet,” the public prosecutor submitted. (ANI)
Also Read: Bollywood actor Ranbir Kapoor gets trolled yet again for his statements about Alia
Also watch: