Orissa HC Orders ₹10 Lakh Compensation in Street Dog Attack Case

The Orissa High Court issued a directive in the matter of Bibhuti Charan Mohanty v. State of Odisha and Ors, directing the Puri Municipal Corporation to provide compensation amounting to ₹10 lakh to the father of a child who fell victim to a fatal attack by street dogs in 2016.

The division bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice BR Sarangi and Justice Murahari Sri Raman, expressed the view that the municipal authorities bear the statutory responsibility for the cleanliness of the town and the management of stray dogs and pigs.

The court concluded that the Puri municipality had not taken sufficient precautions for the upkeep of street dogs, dismissing the argument that the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950, lacked provisions for compensation.

Emphasizing that street dog attacks within the Puri Municipality fall under the purview of the Odisha Municipal Act, the Court held that the negligence exhibited by the Municipal Authorities in fulfilling their statutory duties does not absolve them of the liability to compensate.

The Court stated, “The negligence caused by the Municipal Authorities in due discharge of their statutory responsibilities cannot absolve its liability to pay compensation, contending that there is no provision under the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 to pay compensation.”

This order stemmed from a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by a lawyer seeking directions to regulate the movement of dogs within residential areas and to grant compensation to the grieving parents of the deceased child, Satyabrata Rout, who lost his life within minutes of a street dog attack in December 2016.

Notably, Satyabrata Rout was the only son of his parents.

Acknowledging the mental anguish experienced by the parents due to the loss of their child, the Court found it distressing that the municipal authority, after initially providing ₹50,000, had not taken further remedial measures.

The Court underscored that the payment of compensation is not merely a gesture of sympathy, obligation, or compassion but an essential measure to address the irreparable loss or damages caused by the negligence and indifferent attitude of the Municipal Administration.

Considering various judicial precedents on compensation issues, the Court directed the municipality to disburse the sum of ₹10 lakh to the victim’s father within a period of four weeks.