2026 Supreme(SC) 848

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjay Karol, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.
Nisha – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Council Sangrur & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal No(s) 9922 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP(C) No(s). 4663 of 2026)
Decided On : 31-07-2026

Writ jurisdiction is maintainable for compensation in cases involving stray animal accidents if the facts are consistent and significant delays render civil remedies inequitable. Courts must ensure just relief while emphasizing state obligations to manage animal populations and ensure public safety under constitutional principles of compassion and duty.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability - Disputed questions of fact - Claims for compensation arising from accidents involving stray animals - Where the factual matrix is consistent and an existing claim was disregarded without investigation, relegating parties to civil litigation after significant efflux of time causes irreparable injustice - Constitutional courts may exercise jurisdiction to provide relief instead of denying the claim on grounds of procedural technicalities. (Paras 6-8)

(B) Fundamental Duty - Article 51-A(g) - Requirement to have compassion for living creatures - Obligation extends to ensuring the welfare of cattle and the safety of human life in urban environments - State and local authorities bear an obligation to maintain control over stray animals to prevent public endangerment. (Paras 12, 16)

(C) Statutory Duty - Responsibility for management and control of animals - Owners and administrative bodies - Duty to maintain functioning shelters and pounds to prevent animals from roaming on public roads, thereby mitigating hazards to pedestrians and drivers. (Paras 17, 19, 21)

Facts of the case:
The appellant filed a petition seeking compensation for the death of her spouse caused by a collision with a stray animal. An initial order granting compensation was set aside by the appellate bench on the ground that the matter involved disputed questions of fact meant for civil courts. The appeal challenged this, noting the extensive time elapsed and the established nature of the incident.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the incident was well-documented via administrative and police records, making the facts effectively undisputed. It held that the immense delay in proceedings would make it inequitable to force the claimant to restart the process in a civil court, which would render her remediless. Finding the state and local bodies responsible for failing to manage stray bovine populations, the court awarded a lump sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- as compensation.

Issues: Whether a writ petition is maintainable for compensation in accidents involving stray animals where factual disputes are alleged; and the extent of state and local authority responsibility regarding the management and control of stray cattle.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the facts pertaining to an incident are established and the passage of time renders alternative civil remedies illusory, the constitutional court must intervene to ensure just and fair relief. Furthermore, the state is duty-bound to implement mechanisms for controlling stray animals, as their presence on public roads constitutes a preventable risk to human life and an issue of public safety.

Result: Appeal allowed.