Man Jailed In Mumbai After His Dog Bites Neighbor In Lift; Court Says He Showed No Compassion

A Mumbai court sentenced a man to four months in jail after his dog bit a neighbor in a lift. The judge noted that the owner ignored warnings and showed no care for others’ safety.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Man Jailed in Mumbai After His Dog Bites Neighbor in Lift; Court Says He Showed No Compassion

MUMBAI: A man named Rishab Maushik Patel, who lives in Worli, was sent to jail for four months because his pet dog bit a neighbor in a lift. This happened inside a residential building called Alfa Apartment.

The court, led by Judicial Magistrate First Class Suhas Vijaya P Bhosale, said that the man did not handle his dog carefully, even after being warned many times. The judge said the dog was “sicced” on the victim. The court pointed out how dangerous this situation was, especially because a small child was also present in the lift during the incident.

ALSO READ: Supreme Court Slams Army Officer: “Back Pain? Then Even Judges Would Be on Leave!”

The judge clearly mentioned in the court order dated May 21:

“Looking at aggravating circumstances it appears from record that at the time of incident one and half year old son of the informant was with him inside the lift. The way in which the accused dragged his pet inside the lift as is visible from CCTV footage (Exh. 25) shows that he is not compassionate towards his own pet. He did not care about the informant, his son and dragged his own pet inside the lift which is normally meant for use by the human. The act of accused resulted in injury to the informant. Considering punishment prescribed for the offences proved and facts of case, the accused is certainly not entitle to too much leniency.”

The whole matter started on February 1, 2018. On that day, Ramik Shah, the man who was bitten, was inside the lift with his one-and-a-half-year-old son and a domestic helper. The lift stopped on the third floor, and Rishab Patel tried to get in with his pet dog, a Husky.

Shah told Patel not to enter the lift because his child was scared of dogs. But Patel still entered the lift. He reportedly forced his way in and allegedly made the dog attack Shah. The dog bit Shah on his left arm. After this, Shah got medical help and filed a police complaint at the Worli Police Station.

Patel was then charged under three sections of the Indian Penal Code –

Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt),
Section 289 (negligent conduct with respect to animal), and
Section 506 (criminal intimidation).

During the court trial, the government lawyer (prosecutor) said that there was strong proof including CCTV footage, medical records, and statements from witnesses. All of this showed that Patel was responsible for the bite.

However, Patel’s lawyer said that there were some problems with the evidence. He said the time of hospital admission was not matching and claimed that Shah filed the case because they didn’t get along. He also questioned the CCTV footage, saying it was not collected properly, and said that Shah took too long to get medical help, which he claimed showed there was no serious dog bite.

ALSO READ: Shocking Jail Blunder: Name Confusion Leads To Release Of Rape Accused Instead Of Prisoner Granted Bail

Still, the court did not agree with these arguments. It found Patel guilty under Sections 324 and 289. The court clearly said:

“Overall from the facts on record the prosecution has successfully proved all material ingredients of Section 324 of IPC. The accused knowingly omitted to take such order with his pet dog as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life, or any probable danger of grievous hurt from his pet to the informant, his son and Mr Anuj Singh. Thus, there is sufficient evidence to prove all material ingredients of charge punishable under Section 289 of IPC.”

However, the court found that there was not enough evidence to prove criminal intimidation under Section 506. So, Patel was not found guilty of that particular charge.

The punishment given was as follows:

Four months of rigorous jail under Section 324 IPC and a fine of Rs 3,000.
Three months of rigorous jail under Section 289 IPC and a fine of Rs 1,000.

Both sentences will run at the same time. If Patel fails to pay the fines, he will have to stay in jail for 15 more days. The court also said that once the judgment is final, the money collected as a fine should be given to the victim Shah as compensation.

ALSO READ: BREAKING | Bomb Threat at Jaipur Family Court: Full Evacuation, Police Action & Security Update

The lawyer for the government, Assistant Public Prosecutor Enakphal, represented the State. Rishab Patel was represented by Advocate RR Mishra.