Court Rules Obstruction Based on Safety Concerns Does Not Constitute Wrongful Restraint
In a significant judgment delivered on December 18, 2025, the Bombay High Court has quashed an FIR filed against Mr. Ayyappa Swami, a resident of Rama Melange Society, Hinjewadi, Pune, for allegedly obstructing the feeding of stray dogs in his society premises. The FIR, registered with Hinjewadi Police Station, accused Mr. Swami of wrongful restraint and criminal intimidation under Sections 126(2), 351(1), and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The bench, comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Sandesh D. Patil, examined the circumstances surrounding the case and found that the actions of Mr. Swami were justified due to safety concerns for children and society members. The court noted that feeding stray dogs near school bus stops and entry/exit points of the society posed a significant risk, given the history of dog bites in the area.
The judgment emphasized that obstructing a person with a good faith belief of a lawful right, especially when it concerns the safety of residents, does not amount to wrongful restraint under Section 126 of the BNS. Furthermore, the court observed that the offences alleged under Sections 351(1) and 351(2) are non-cognizable, thus reinforcing the decision to quash the FIR.
The case unfolded when Respondent No.2, a social worker, alleged that Mr. Swami prevented her and her colleagues from feeding stray dogs and obstructed her vehicle. Mr. Swami contended that his actions were motivated by safety concerns, citing multiple incidents of dog attacks in the society.
The court highlighted the absence of concrete evidence supporting the allegations and pointed out the delay of four months in filing the FIR, which appeared to be a counterblast to prior complaints made by Mr. Swami. The judgment aligns with the Supreme Court's directive to regulate stray dog feeding practices to prevent safety hazards in public spaces.
The High Court's decision underscores the importance of balancing animal welfare efforts with community safety and sets a precedent for handling similar disputes under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Bottom Line:
Quashing of FIR under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on grounds of non-disclosure of wrongful restraint and non-cognizable nature of certain offences.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Sections 126(2), 351(1), 351(2), 126(1), 528
Mr. Ayyappa Swami v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2825418
