The incident occurred at approximately 11:30 pm on April 26, when a local resident, Ruksana Shaikh, witnessed the act shortly after leaving the clinic with her pet cat. Acting swiftly, she raised an alarm, drawing the attention of the clinic staff and nearby individuals.
According to reports, the clinic staff confronted the accused, who responded aggressively and claimed that the dog did not belong to them. The dog, named ‘Shadow’, was reportedly yelping in pain during the assault and was later identified as belonging to a nearby dairy owner.
Following an emergency helpline call, Malwani Police arrived at the scene and arrested the accused, identified as Naresh Chandulkar, a resident of Malad East. He was booked under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.
The case has drawn significant concern not only due to its brutality but also because of the growing frequency of such offences. Psychologists classify such acts as “paraphilic crossover,” a condition in which one atypical sexual behaviour is often accompanied by others. Research has linked this pattern to factors such as childhood trauma, antisocial personality disorder, and a desire for power and control over a vulnerable being incapable of resistance or reporting abuse.
The incident has also highlighted critical gaps in India’s legal system. For decades, Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code served as the primary legal provision to prosecute acts of bestiality, carrying penalties ranging from up to 10 years’ imprisonment to life imprisonment. However, with the introduction of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on July 1, 2024, Section 377 was repealed without any replacement provision specifically addressing sexual crimes against animals.
At present, authorities can only invoke Section 325 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, which pertains to mischief involving the killing or maiming of animals, along with provisions under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The latter prescribes penalties as low as Rs 50 for first-time offenders, a figure widely criticised by animal rights activists as grossly inadequate.
Efforts to address these shortcomings are underway but remain slow. The Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations has filed public interest litigations in both the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, seeking stricter legal provisions. A proposed amendment to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act includes Section 13A, which aims to reintroduce stringent penalties, including life imprisonment or up to 10 years in prison for acts of bestiality.
The Delhi High Court has urged the government to take action on two occasions, in August 2024 and May 2025, yet no legislative amendment or final judicial ruling has been issued.
Globally, many democracies treat such acts as serious criminal offences. Countries including Germany, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have explicitly criminalised bestiality. Denmark strengthened its legal framework in 2015 to eliminate loopholes that previously required demonstrable harm to the animal for prosecution, a standard that critics argue closely resembles India’s current legal limitations.
In Malad West, Shadow’s distress unfolded in full public view, outside a veterinary clinic and in the presence of witnesses. While the accused has been arrested, the broader question of whether the law can deliver meaningful punishment remains unresolved, underscoring a critical gap in the country’s approach to animal protection and justice.
About The Author
Comment List