Between Philosophy And Law - The Juridical Imagination Of The Forgotten Subjects Of Nature
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND LAW: THE JURIDICAL
IMAGINATION OF THE FORGOTTEN SUBJECTS OF
NATURE
Shubham Shushma Baadkar, B.A. LL.B., Thakur Ramnarayan College of Law Samiksha Sharma, B.A.LL.B., KES’ Shri Jyantilal H. Patel Law College
ABSTRACT
The relationship between nature, humans and non-human animals has shifted from benevolence to domination, leading to both ethical and ecological imbalances. While non-human animals share fundamental biological traits and have inherent rights to co-exist, humans, known to be the apex species, often exploit them through neglect. In India, constitutional and policy frameworks mandate compassion for living beings, yet animal welfare remains in a shell. This research paper critically examines the hypocrisy of the human superiority complex. This paper will delve into how coexistence is preached, but exploitation persists, further arguing for an urgent shift from tokenistic measures to genuine stewardship of the ecosystem. Keywords: nature, humans, animals, co-existence, judiciary, India, hypocrisy, welfare, legal rights, personhood, exploitation
Introduction: Nature, Species and their Fragile Balance Nature is more than a word for plants, animals, rivers and our surroundings. It is an inherent character, particularly of the ecosphere. It is an evolutionary process that humans have disrupted. What was an evolutionary process has now become a revolutionary one. Nature has long been revered as a mother, symbolising benevolence and organic life. In the Victorian era, this perception shifted to view nature as vengeful and ruthless.
Nature was regarded as an obstacle to human existence and progress; however contemporarily the perspective has reversed and changes are accepted in nature when they occur slowly and gradually like an individual maturing with personality development where each stage holds its own value yet even after awareness of these changes tensions are often created, the tension is most visible in form of man nature and man animal conflicts.
Animals constitute a single Kingdom of living organisms that includes a diverse range of species such as humans, dogs, corals, worms, sponges etcetera despite this diversity all animals share a set of defining characteristics that distinguish them from other life forms like plants and fungi, it is revealed that all animals share specific DNA sequences unique to their kingdom underscoring their common evolutionary heritage the combination of traits like heterotrophy, movement, genetic commonality, multi cellularity with cellular differentiation symmetry and collagen based tissue construction defines the animal Kingdom and explains its vast diversity. Man is the roof and crown of creation. It is his intelligence and capacities that differentiate him from other animals. A man is born with some inherent rights, and so do animals.
Animal rights can be described as a point of view that animals do have an inherent right to live according to themselves, free from abuse, harm and potential exploitation by superior intellect species. These rights advocates believe that animals should live freely without human interference. Though in, 17th century, philosophers like René Descartes claimed that animals are unfeeling machines, during the modern revolution, rights for animals evolved. During the industrial era, traumatic working conditions raised questions about the treatment of animals in that industrial era, which further led to organised animal advocacy efforts. 1 In the early stages, the focus was primarily on appealing to human compassion towards animals, but in contemporary times, efforts are focused more on reducing animal exploitation through stronger legal protection. 1 Darlim, S. (2024b, January 16).
Animal Rights Movement: Understanding when and why it started. Animal Charity Evaluators.
Humans have been recognised as apex predators, it is a status earned through a combination of technological advancements, societal structures and biological traits. This position is a consequence of our unique cognitive abilities, ethical considerations, as well as physical processes. 2Archaeological findings such as stable isotope analysis of bones have revealed that the prehistoric humans were specialised in hunting big animals, which reinforces our role as hypercarnivores. Beyond biological factors, humans are unique in their ability to make ethical decisions that influence their interactions with other species and the ecosystem. This capacity for reasoning allows humans to reflect on their impact and consider the moral implications of their actions on the ecosystem. The choices are not fully driven by instinct or necessity but are rather guided by complex ethical frameworks.
A wise man said, “With great power comes great responsibility”. As humans migrate, explore,
and go about their daily lives, they inevitably alter their immediate surroundings, sometimes having global impacts on other organisms and the planet as a whole. For example, humans released cane toads in the South Pacific and Caribbean to control sugar cane pests; these are actions that often lead to unforeseen and sometimes catastrophic consequences. Humans are an exceptionally resilient species, capable of enduring and adapting to less-than-ideal conditions. We have expanded our limits from fertile African grasslands, the driest deserts of Africa, Asia, Australia and America, which experienced the harshest environments on earth, to Arctic and remote islands across all latitudes.
In each of these challenging environments, we have found ways to utilise available resources and generate a good, integrated, interdependent and dynamic balance with other living organisms and non-living elements. 3 This adaptive ability has not only allowed us to survive but also to transcend major existence by developing culture and giving meaning to our lives. As we moved beyond survival, we started increasing control over the ecosystem and started dominating it in several ways. This control has fuelled a desire to dominate and accumulate more than what we need. The need to care for our environment and ecosystem was hardly a concern when we were just an insignificant part of it. However, as we begin to impact it more, we become responsible for what is now called as ecological damage.
We essentially created the concept of pollution, we created the concept of deforestation, and our actions led to the endangerment of animal species. There are several other organisms inhabiting our ecosystem, but only humans are labelled as polluters. Humans are labelled as 2 Lewis, P. M. (2017, September 12). Response and responsibility: Humans as apex predators and ethical actors in a changing societal environment - sciencedirect.
3 Bleier, M. (2021, July). Should we bother to practice ecological responsibility?
the apex predators because of their unique cognitive ability, biological and physical traits, and this label imposes a responsibility on them to utilise their powers and abilities in protecting the ecosystem. The Anthropocene refers to the contemporary era, marked by humanity’s big impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Primarily through agriculture and industrial practices, humans have become the most influential species on the planet, which contributes to human-wildlife compatibility issues or as it is said, conflicts. 4As we encroach upon animal habitats, we compete with animals for space and natural resources. It is only in the last 13,000 years that humans have established settlements and begun to extensively use various plant and animal species.
The domestication of animals such as goats, sheep, dogs, cows, cats and pigs, along with the evolving dynamics of human-animal relationships, has been documented very well. A significant number of animals, especially those that cohabitate, are abandoned, neglected or unnecessarily abused. Similar to their interpersonal relationships, humans do not always act in the interest of animals; instead, most of the time, their personal needs, desires, and self-interests take precedence, whether intentionally or not, resulting in dysfunctional interactions or conflicts between humans and animals. Humans have a perception that they are separate from nature and often have a view that they can control, dominate or exploit the ecosystem.
However, a more accurate perspective is that humans are not the ecosystem itself, but the ecosystem is a complex web of living organisms and non-living elements interacting with each other in a delicate balance. This understanding is crucial when we humans share our space with habitable animals. Wild animals remain independent of human influence, but various habitable animals have adapted to live along with humans. Such animals have been domesticated over thousands of years, evolving alongside humans as companions. Understanding Co-existence shifts our responsibility from domination to stewardship. We are part of the ecosystem, not the ecosystem.
Allocation on Paper, Abandonment on Ground The government’s role is essential for maintaining social order, promoting public welfare, and ensuring stability, with its policies and actions having a significant impact on the day-to-day lives of individuals. The Indian Constitution exhorts every citizen to have “Compassion for
4 Human-wildlife conflict: Terms & definitions. IFAW. (2024, February 2).
living creatures” under Article 51A(g). 5This duty morally extends to the state. Yet in practice, “The Duty of Care” to non-human animals often falls through administrative cracks. In the Union Budget 2025-26, the Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying saw its largest outlay, with ₹4840. 40 crore allocated to that department, but only a tiny slice of this trickles down to animal welfare programs. The statutory Animal Welfare Board of India (further referred to as AWBI), which advises the government and runs the animal shelter scheme, was allocated just ₹10. 30 crore in 2025-26. Animal Husbandry and Dairying schemes like Livestock Health and Disease Control received hundreds of crores. Only ₹10,00,00,000 per year is given to the Animal Welfare Board of India to oversee welfare activities across 1. 4 billion people and an enormous animal population.
Even within the schemes of the Animal Welfare Board of India, the gaps are huge. In 2023-24, the budget allowed ₹1. 50 crore for building Municipal shelters, but only ₹ 42. 22 lakh was actually spent. This suggests administrative delays and a lack of utilisation of funds allocated properly. 6 In 2023-24, AWBI reports that it granted ₹4. 50 crore to 277 NGOs, gaushalas and SPCAs for shelters, medical care and ABC programs. But these efforts are still patchy, as large cities still lack a single municipal dog shelter; there is no land, no plan, no funding. 7 The funds that do exist are unevenly applied. Under the new Animal Birth Control rules, local bodies can get up to 15 lakh rupees per small shelter. But ₹15,00,000 might buy a modest shed or two, but it will be insufficient for even a few dozen dogs. Similarly, ₹800 allocated per sterilisation would barely cover vet fees.
A lot of NGOs have pointed out that vaccinating 1,00,000 dogs, which drove rabies cases from 20,000 to 54 per year nationwide, costs around
1000 rupees per dog.
The land allotted for animal shelters, in many cases, is frequently diverted through repurposing or neglect. Lands intended for building rehabilitation centres, veterinary hospitals or shelters are converted into commercial ventures. The result is not only a loss of infrastructure for animal welfare, but also a breach of resources. In some cases, the land allocated for animal shelters is
5 Dewangan, V. (2022, July 17). Animal welfare. Whitefield Rising.
6 Sandesh, P. (2025, February 15). Budget for Animal Husbandry and dairying (2025-26): Analysis. Budget for Animal Husbandry and Dairying (2025-26): Analysis Pashu Sandesh. 7 Shukla , A. (2025, August 12). ABC sterilisation only solution, plan for shelters is flawed: Delhi News - Times of India. The Times of India.
opposed. For instance, in Noida, Residents opposed the building of an animal shelter on a vacant plot; instead, they advocated for building a park for children. 8 Beyond cities, governments’ inaction on preserving natural habitats is a critical animal welfare issue. Every time a lake or forest is bulldozed, the animals have nowhere to go. A wildlife biologist once remarked, We are encroaching into their natural habitat, so these poor animals have nowhere to go. And the truth of the statement is visible every day, leopard snakes, monkeys, wander into housing colonies, parking tragic conflicts. Legally, most of the Aravallis are protected forests under the Supreme Court and state directives, yet the reality on the ground is different. Influential interests bulldoze through these rules, and the government often looks the other way.
Powerful people are constantly flouting the law, and the government is protecting them. 9 Powai lake, a serene artificial water body nestled amid Mumbai's urban sprawl, is now encircled by railings and fences installed by the Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation as a part of beautification and safety efforts, including the creation of jogging tracks and promenades, this physical barriers while enhancing human access and aesthetic appeal inadvertently restrict local animals such as stray Dogs10, Cattle and Buffalo from reaching the lake for vital resources like water and this fencing coupled with concrete walkways and boundary walls effectively cut off animal population from natural access point that might once have been available altering wildlife movement and behaviour in the area.
Ironically, our constitution interests both citizens and the state with the duty to protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife. Yet when the lakes are drained for highways or forest patches are cleared for real estate and mining, this duty vanishes in the dust. A striking example of this is Faridabad, where the destruction of the lake deprived wildlife of its water source, forcing desperate animals into human settlements. Our slogans speak of ecological balance, but in reality, bulldozers usually win. Once displaced, these animals are branded as menaces, but who protects the protected? 11 If a cow collapses on 8 Meenakshi Sinha / TNN / Jun 23, 2024. (2024). Noida: Sector 117 residents oppose Animal Shelter on vacant plot: Noida News - Times of India. The Times of India. 9 Ghosh , S. (2019, February 7).
With increasing human encroachment, wild animals have nowhere to go. Newslaundry. 10 Choksi , M. (2012, May 12). Unfinished business at Powai Lake: Mumbai News - Times of India. The Times of India. 11 Ghosh , S. (2019, February 7). With increasing human encroachment, wild animals have nowhere to go. Newslaundry.
the road or a deer strays into our lands, shouldn't the bulldozer also be seen as our collective responsibility? Surprisingly the government has effectively encroached upon the natural resources of habitat for animals, barring them from access to essential resources necessary for their day to day survival while fences walls and other beautification measures around water bodies like Powai Lake are justified on grounds of human safety and aesthetics, this simultaneously deprive animals such as dogs, cattle and buffaloes of their primary sources of food and water, what is more concerning is that no parallel efforts are undertaken by civic authorities to compensate for this loss, such as organised feeding drives, provision of alternative water points or designated access zone for animals.
This one-sided approach reflects a lack of responsibility towards non-human species whose basic needs are disregarded in the name of Urban Development. Meanwhile, the veterinary services in India remain starved of attention, even in Chandigarh, which is a planned city. Government animal hospitals lack basic equipment like X-rays or ultrasound in rural areas. Facilities are even scarcer; this neglect means that diseases, which should be manageable, sometimes erupt into epidemics. 12 The government has introduced initiatives like the National Rabies Control Programme, sterilisation grants and hospital funding, but the gap between intent and infrastructure is glaring. For example, the new Animal Birth Control scheme allocates ₹2,00,00,000 per state hospital. It is a meaningful step, yet barely enough to set up a single well-equipped facility. The result is a fragile animal welfare system.
We have budget lines on paper, but execution falters. The state has a constitutional and moral duty towards all living beings, yet funding is token, laws are weakly informed, and priorities remain skewed. Double Standards: Apex Species’ Apex Hypocrisy Humanity claims to be the planet's apex species but true dominance comes with responsibility we are not apart from nature 13but deeply interested in it politicians however often reduce nature to a resource to be mined, cut or sold in the name of growth but imagine if you accidentally 12 Akashdeep Virk / Jul 09, 2025. Thoroughbreds wait their turn as city plans first state-of-the-art vet facility: Chandigarh News - Times of India. The Times of India
13 Dalrymple, S. (2022). Are humans separate from nature? - bes. British Ecological Society.
push someone into the sea isn’t it your moral obligation to save them similarly if our actions drive a species into the brink how can we absolve ourselves? Humans and livestock outnumber wild mammals by a staggering 30:1 ratio. Wild mammals today make up less than 10% of total mammal biomass. The biosphere has been reshaped into a human-dominated system, pretending that we are exempt from ecological rules, which is a dangerous illusion that is leading to dangerous consequences. 14 The responsibilities are heavier still because our survival depends on ecosystems. 60% of emerging human diseases are zoonotic, directly linked to disrupted animal and environmental health. 15This duty is especially potent for domestic animals who share our homes and towns.
So path forward cannot be domination but coexistence that means real enforcement of wildlife laws green corridors in cities shelters and wet hospitals for stray public education on animal interaction and human practices for farmers and residents alike science shows coexistence is practical constitution asks us to be guardians not exploiters while tradition teaches us compassion the question is will we choose to live up to our apex status by sharing this planet responsibly? Though we are the supreme species, our reality is still very harsh. In India, with 1. 4 billion people, nearly half under 25, the population is booming every year, and this is projected to peak at 1. 67 billion mid-century. 16With this, the pressure on land and resources is immense. Urbanisation surges, with nearly 400 million internal migrants crowding into towns because of this, slums grow and overcrowding worsens.
In 2011, over 6,50,00,000 Indians lived in slums, often without clean water, sanitation or secure shelter. With this comes a rise in crimes and diseases; crimes against women and children are alarmingly high. Overcrowded jails reflect an overstretched justice system, while untreated STDs and HIV quietly spread in both cities and villages. 17Officially, there were about 5. 8 million cognizable crimes in 2022. 18Rural-urban differences are striking but complex, as cities see more cyber and property crime, while many 14 Science, W. I. of. (2023, February 27). The weight of responsibility: Biomass of livestock dwarfs that of wild mammals. 15 Vu, L. , & Nair, D. (2025). India accelerates progress on one health: A critical step in pandemic preparedness. World Bank Blogs. 16 Silver, L. (2023, February 9). Key facts as India surpasses China as the world’s most populous country.
Pew Research Center. 17 S. , Neelannavar, & Kulkarni, Arunkumar. (2025). Challenges and changes in urban slums in India: A review approach. International Journal of Southern Economic Light.
18 Drishti IAS. (2023, December 6). NCRB’s crime in India 2022 report.
rural crimes go unreported. Traditional crimes, such as domestic cruelty, assault and kidnapping, are still persistent. What does a government do when faced with a nation's woes of joblessness, homelessness, crowded jails, and sick citizens? When it comes to unemployment, their government intervenes by creating a conducive environment for economic growth and employment generation. It sets policies that influence industrial growth, regulates labour laws, and promotes infrastructure development, which indirectly fosters job creation. It is the government's job and responsibility to plan and regulate Urban Development to prevent chaotic and unsustainable growth. It establishes zoning laws, land use regulations, and building codes to guide the development of affordable Housing and Urban infrastructure. The government fulfils its most fundamental responsibility, which is public health.
It involves regulating sanitation, controlling disease outbreaks, and promoting health awareness. The government oversees hospitals, medical colleges, and public health institutions and is responsible for setting standards of care. Just like the human population of India, the urban Indian streets teem with untended creatures, and an estimated 6,20,00,000 free-roaming dogs survive in India 19that are mostly unneutered, unvaccinated, and even the government's own livestock census 2019 counts only about 2. 3 million stray dogs and cattle together20, suggesting that many animals evade official surveys. Much of this canine population comes from the overlap of abandoned pets, unchecked breeding and cultural ambivalence. If India’s streets are so crowded with dogs, who is really in charge?
Alongside dogs, there is a very large underlying population of free-roaming cats in both urban and rural areas, even though precise national counts are lacking. Monkeys too join India's street creatures. Roughly 50,000,000 monkeys and langurs live in or near human settlements. 21 They raid garbage and temples when often fed in religious belief, then they attack when food is withheld or territory is encroached. As this population rise, the incidents of attacks by stray animals are expected to escalate, according to the National Health data report. There were about 3. 72 million dog bite cases in
2024.22 Monkeys and cats also contribute to these statistics, usually in smaller numbers but still
19 Tandon, A. (2025, September 2). Street dogs in the spotlight as rabies eradication deadline comes closer. Mongabay.
20 PIB Delhi. (2022, March 15). Press Information Bureau. STRAY ANIMALS.
21 Gupta, A. (2025, August 21). Monkeys and cities: The urban wildlife syndrome. Wildlife SOS.
22 Sreekandan, N. (2025, August 30). Does India have a stray dog epidemic?. Al Jazeera.
persistently. These habitable animals also suffer like humans when it comes to diseases. Stray cats are susceptible to parasitic infections, feline leukaemia virus, and feline immunodeficiency virus. These are prevalent in the street cat population. Monkeys also carry diseases, such as Kyasanur Forest Disease. 23Stray dogs in India often suffer from parasitic infections, infections as Leptospirosis and Brucellosis, 24which have also been reported amongst the stray dog population, proving to be very dangerous for them, but unfortunately, they have to suffer a lot. The government, instead of funding their healthcare, focuses more on reducing their population through ways like sterilisation, relocation, etc. , but is the same treatment given to humans?
While the government actions aim to manage the stray animal population and mitigate disease risks, they often fail to address the underlying health issues affecting these animals. Despite the prevalence of diseases among these animals, there is a lack of comprehensive healthcare initiatives. The government fails to provide veterinary services; if they exist, they are rather limited, and most of the animals do not receive timely medical attention. This neglect increases their sufferings and contributes to the spread of diseases. The intellectual differentia behind this lies in law, resource priorities and social values. In India, animals are legally regarded as property or livestock, not rights-bearing persons, so policymakers prioritise managing animal numbers over individual treatment.
Indian law and administration practice this bias fully under the constitution, livestock protection and prevention of animal diseases fall to the state governments’ duty, and local bodies manage cattle pounds. There is no constitutional right to health for animals. The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 prohibits cruelty but does not entitle animals to government-funded healthcare. 25Instead, recent government advisories like the Animal Birth Control Rules direct municipalities to implement sterilisation programs. 26The Indian law still treats animals as legal property whose interests can be subordinated to human interests. This legal classification underlies the preference for controlling animal populations. 27 23 Borkataki, Sanku & Katoch, Rajesh & Goswami, Pankaj & Godara, R. & Khajuria, JK & Yadav, Anish & Kaur, R. (2013).
Prevalence of parasitic infections of stray cats in Jammu, India. Sokoto Journal of Veterinary Sciences.
11. 10.4314/sokjvs.v11i1.1.
24 Sharma, V., Sharma, R., Aulakh, R. S., & Singh, B. B. (2023). Prevalence of Brucella species in stray cattle, dogs and cats: A systematic review. Preventive veterinary medicine, 219, 106017
25 The prevention of cruelty to animals act, 1960.
26 Animal Birth Control (dogs) rules, 2001 the Gazette of India.
27 Ashima Sharma, B. M. U. (2025, September 7). Do animals have rights? the SC ruling on stray dogs shows why this needs to change.
“Infants and young children should not, at any cost, fall prey to rabies. The action should inspire confidence that they can move freely without fear of being bitten by stray dogs. ” In this backdrop, the Honourable Supreme Court of India adopted a stringent stance, issuing directions that mandate the detention of all stray dogs within the territorial jurisdiction of Delhi in shelters. The order categorically declared that no stray dogs, regardless of whether they were sterilised or not, should be released into the public domain. The court further emphasised that not even a single stray dog should be found moving freely in any locality of the city.
The direction was specifically addressed to the government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and the New Delhi Municipal Council, requiring them to take immediate steps to construct shelters, and to ensure that once detained, no dog shall ever be released back onto the streets. 28 Significantly, the court rejected requests for intervention filed by the animal welfare groups and individuals, holding that the issue at stake was one of the larger public interests. It reasons that consideration of sentiment, compassion or emotional attachment must not be permitted to dilute the judicial approach in matters that directly implicate human life, safety, and public health. The bench, therefore, placed human security at the centre of its reasoning.
However, this uncompromising judicial posture triggered widespread protests and resistance from animal rights activists, legal scholars, and veterinarians disorder gave rise to several fundamental questions about feasibility, legality, ethics, and long-term sustainability at the practice level. Legally and financially, India currently treats stray animals as a problem to be managed, not patients to be here. This reflects a worldview where human life and health are paramount, while animal welfare and their health are measured in terms of public interest. Indian cities have long struggled with rapid population growth, with slums like Dharavi in Mumbai housing over a million people per square mile29, putting a huge strain on urban services like schools, hospitals, and housing. However, the Indian Constitution explicitly protects citizens' Right to Internal Movement and Settlement.
Article 19 (1) (d) entitles every Indian to move freely throughout the country, and Article 19 (1) (e) guarantees the Right to 28 Bakshi, G. K. (2025, August 23). Supreme Court directs shifting of all stray dogs in Delhi to dog shelters; warns persons obstructing of penal action. Live Law.
29 Coolgeography. UIC - Mumbai - See Challenges. Coolgeography.
reside or settle in any part of India. 30 Courts have repeatedly ruled that these rights cannot be curtailed except by narrow public interest restrictions. In practice, this means local or state governments cannot simply ban migration into crowded cities. For example, Maharashtra and Delhi, India's largest recipient states, absorbed around 60,00,000 migrants by 2011. 31. Yet, authorities must focus on expanding infrastructure and services rather than stopping newcomers. Indeed, India's family planning policy is entirely voluntary, with no laws allowing for the sterilisation of people, as this would violate Article 21 on Personal Liberty. The memory of coercive sterilisation during the 1970s Emergency 32has made such measures politically and legally untenable.
In short, human overpopulation is addressed through planning and incentives, not compulsion, as every citizen retains fundamental freedoms of movement and personal autonomy. In contrast, India treats animal overpopulation with statutory mandates for population control. The Central Government's Animal Birth Control Rules 2023, under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, require local bodies to capture, neuter, vaccinate, and release street dogs and cats. In practice, urban municipalities work with NGOs to trap street dogs, surgically sterilise and immunise them, and then return them to their territory, aiming for at least 70% coverage to break the breeding cycle. Likewise, over 1,70,000 monkeys in Himachal Pradesh alone were sterilised by 2021 under a government program.
Even the culling of monkeys is sometimes authorised by declaring them vermin when they raid crops or homes, but these measures are banned by court order. In 2025, a Supreme Court bench directed that all stray dogs picked up in Delhi be sterilised, vaccinated, and released rather than killed. The court called sterilisation and immunisation scientifically sound solutions to prevent dog overcrowding while treating animals humanely. In short, stray animals, lacking constitutional rights, are legally classified as a public health nuisance problem, and the government actively enforces their population control through neutering and relocation. Judiciary at Crossroads: Corporations Get it, Animals Await It India's constitution and laws emphasise humane treatment of all living beings.
For example, Article 51A(G) of the Indian Constitution imposes on every citizen a duty to have compassion for living creatures, and Article 48A directs the state to protect forests and wildlife33. These 30 Article 19: Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.. Constitution of India. (2023, June 2). 31 PRS Legislative Research. (2025, September 10). Migration in India and the impact of the lockdown on migrants. PRS Legislative Research.
32 Biswas, S. (2014, November 14). India’s Dark History of Sterilisation. BBC News.
33 Article 48A: Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life. Constitution of India. (2023b, April 3).
provisions were enacted by the 42nd Amendment in 1976 to reflect the framers' intent that environmental and animal welfare should guide policy. In landmark cases, the Supreme Court has adopted this ethos, as seen in Animal Welfare Board of India V. Nagaraja (2014)34, where the court held that Article 21, the right to life, extends to animals, requiring that each creature's life be valued with some intrinsic worth, honour, and dignity beyond mere existence. Similarly, in State of Gujarat V. Mirzapur Moti Qureshi Kasab Jamat (2005)35, it was ruled that citizens must show compassion towards the animal kingdom and that animals have their own fundamental rights. Thus, India’s constitutional scheme embodies an obligation to protect animals and treat them humanely, even though animals are legally considered living creatures other than humans under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees that no person is denied equality before the law 36or the equal protection of the laws by the states. The Supreme Court has long held that Article 14 prohibits class legislation but permits reasonable classification to be valid. Any law that treats groups differently must be based on an intelligible differentia that bears a rational nexus to the law's objective. In plain terms, like cases must be treated alike and unlike cases may be treated differently only for valid reasons. For example, in Anwar Ali Sarkar v. The State of West Bengal (1952)37, the court explained that classification must rest on a basis or principle that is ascertainable and not arbitrary, and that this difference must directly further the statute's purpose.
Applying this to human versus animal, it is indisputable that the two categories differ in capacities and responsibilities. Humans generally have greater cognitive abilities, selfawareness and moral duties. That distinction alone can justify certain legal differences; for instance, criminal intent is attributed to humans but not to animals. However, any such classification must still be rational. If the objective is public health or population control, the chosen means must reasonably relate to that goal. For example, if the overpopulation of stray dogs poses a rabies risk, the law may address dogs differently than humans, but it must do so in a fair, effective way. Courts have begun to scrutinise these policies.
In 2025, the Supreme Court sharply rebuked India’s dog control rules as “absurd”, noting that the rule of simply “sterilise and return” stray dogs to the street had no rational link to child safety. The court
34 Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, (2014) 7 SCC 547
35 State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti KureshiKassabJamat and Others, (2005), 8 S.C.C 534.
36 Article 14: Equality Before Law. Constitution of India. (2023a, April 14).
37 AIR 1952 SC 75
directed instead that authorities pick up dogs from all localities and shift them to shelter homes. For the time being, forget the rules. This indicates the judiciary’s non-consideration towards animal liberty and giving more leverage to human supremacy rather than co-existence. In contrast, human population policy relies on voluntary family planning; coercive sterilisation of people is unconstitutional and ethically rejected in India. It would be irrational and extreme to force-sterilise humans for overcrowding while sterilising stray dogs involuntarily. Similarly, one cannot lawfully kill healthy humans to prevent disease spread, whereas culling animals for rabies control is sometimes permitted; this raises Article 14 and questions about proportionality.
One of the major issues in focusing on the rights of animals is that under Indian laws, nonhuman animals don't come under the ambit of a person. A legal person is simply an entity recognised by law as capable of holding the rights and correlative duties. This is not a biological definition; a person does not require two legs and a big brain. Instead law creates the category of person to designate who can hold legal rights. All human beings are legal persons, and nonhuman entities can be too; for example, corporations are treated as legal persons under Indian law and can sue or be sued38. Conversely, entities deemed legal things like animals under traditional property law have no inherent rights. Black's Law Dictionary long defined a person as “any being whom the law regards as capable of rights or duties”39.
In short, personhood means being an aspect of law able to have rights and to impose duties, but it does not buy itself require having moral agency or even full human attributes. Persons, natural or juristic, can hold claim rights enforceable in court; non-persons, like ordinary physical objects, cannot. For instance, corporations have been deemed persons, so they can sue or protect their interests. Legally, if A has A right against B, then B owes a duty to a person’s duty is simply another claim. Thus, one does not need to be a duty bearer to hold a claim right. Infants cannot drive or sign contracts, yet have rides, and humans under disability still have legal rights. In fact, courts have emphasised that requiring a person to bear a duty for another person would be flawed. Non-autonomous humans influence dementia patients’ lack of duties, but are unquestionably persons.
38 Garg, R. (2022, July 24). A company is an artificial person created by law. iPleaders.
39 Lo, S. (2019, June 26). What is a legal person? law dictionary corrects decades-old error. Nonhuman Rights Project.
A common legal objection is that animals cannot be persons because they cannot bear legal
duties. For example, a New York appellate court in 2014 refused to grant habeas corpus to a chimpanzee, reasoning that their incapability to bear any legal responsibilities and societal duties renders it inappropriate to confer on them liberty. 40In other words, the court held that chimps cannot have enforceable obligations, so they cannot be legal persons. This duty-based reasoning has been widely criticised, and unsound critics note that many acknowledged legal persons have no duties infants, dementia patients people with severe disabilities, yet still hold rights. Indeed, one court remarked that making legal persons who depend on moral agency or duty would absurdly exclude human infants, even though they are of interest and clearly warrant protection.
Importantly, animals do perform complex social roles, for example, wolves hunt to feed the pack, bees pollinate plants, and chimpanzees care for kin. However, practically speaking, animals lack legal agency to be bound by statutes or contracts; thus, if a bee’s duty to pollinate is metaphorical and if that bee stops pollinating, there is no court to hold it accountable. Legal duties around animals flow around animals. Human owners or states bear the duties of care and protection; for example, animal welfare laws imposed on owners are a legal duty to provide food, shelter and care. In sum, the argument that animals fail a duty test conflicts with biological roles, with the legal status quotes and scholars increasingly reject the logic, noting that rights need to be reciprocated by animal obligations.
Even if that is the case, instances of using horses in wars during ancient times and using dogs in Modern Warfare are not unknown. They invariably point out their duty towards their fellow companion and motherland. In nature, every species has a role. Bees pollinate crops, predators control prey populations, and herbivores shape vegetation. For example, about 1/3 of global food crops depend directly on bee pollination. These ecological services are often described as animals’ duties for ecosystem balance. 41 The notion that animals cannot be legal persons because they cannot bear duties is a legal technicality, not an insurmountable barrier. Many accepted right holders, children, incapacitated persons even corporations have rights without corresponding duties, and courts have begun acknowledging this. Denying personhood on the duty basis ignores the fact that
40 Grimm, D. (2014). Chimpanzee “personhood” fails on appeal | science | AAAS. Science.
41 Ritchie, H. (2021, August 2). How much of the world’s food production is dependent on pollinators? Our World in Data.
many legal persons cannot bear duties yet possess the right, as was the case for women for centuries and secluded minorities. Pain, Pleasure and Personhood: Not a Difference of Kind, Only of Degree Charles Darwin first proposed that all life is related. In 1859, he sketched the “tree of life”, concluding that “all the organic beings which have ever lived on the earth have descended from some one primordial form”. Modern genetics has spectacularly confirmed this: every living cell on earth shares the same basic genetic code and many core proteins. For example, all three domains of life ( bacteria, archaea, eukaryotes ) possess the same twenty-three “universal proteins” for DNA/RNA function. Statistical tests show it is astronomically unlikely that life arose independently multiple times; rather, life appears to trace back to a single ancestral cell roughly 3. 5 billion years ago.
In short, humans and animals are descended from that one original Organism, so every species is a branch of one vast family tree. 42 Every species shares a single origin. Genetic analysis supports Darwin’s view of universal descent, that all known organisms descend from “some one primordial form”. For instance, organisms in all domains use the same genetic code and share dozens of key proteins/genes (like the 23 universal proteins) Close relatives have extremely similar genomes; human and chimpanzees, for example, have over 98% identical DNA sequences reflecting recent common ancestry, even very different species use the same nucleotides and cell machinery, underscoring deep unity. Darwin also argued that mental differences are quantitative, not absolute. He wrote that the difference in mind between man and the higher animals certainly is one of degree and not of kind.
Indeed, modern studies find surprising cognitive skills in many species of fish, can recognise themselves in mirrors and source tools, crows can solve puzzles, rats show empathy, and dogs remember past events. 43 Many animals exhibit emotions and social bonds similar to ours. Darwin noted that “the lower animals, like man, manifestly feel pressure and pain, happiness and misery”. 44Today,
42 Than, K. (2021, May 3). All species evolved from single cell, study finds. Adventure.
43 Andrews, K., & Monsó, S. (2021, March 8). Animal cognition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
44 Emory University. (2024, November 15). Scientific thought on emotions in animals. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 10, 2025
laboratory and field studies reinforced this. For example, farm animals groan in pain or coo in contentment, and bees even seem to have moods that improve with treats. 45Wild birds form close pair bonds. One researcher described a male goldfinch tracking and reuniting with its mate behaviour, “not only a feature of humans”, such evidence shows animals have rich lives and feelings and attachment. 46 Darwin foresaw that emotions and minds extend across species. Animals manifestly feel pleasure and misery just like humans. Recent surveys of scientists confirm that 98% of animal cognition researchers say nearly all non-human primates have emotions, and 89% say this for other mammals, 78% for birds, 53% even for fish. In practice, researchers now infer animal feelings from behaviour and Physiology, finding that many species can experience joy, anxiety, boredom or affection.
Recognising this blurs any sharp line between us and them in evolution; humans are simply one branch among many, so we cannot appeal to our common origin and shared mental capacities even in insects and octopuses to justify cruelty or indifference. Evolutionary biology tells us that moral relevance does not depend on species membership, as the mental gap between humans and apes is smaller than that between apes and fish, and the entire range is filled with an innumerable gradations. In other words, humans do not possess a fundamentally different kind of mind; it has only a higher degree of complexity. If we would not abandon a disabled or non-verbal human who lacks certain skills to suffering, then by the same logic, we should extend empathy and rights to animals that are less vocal or intelligent.
Dismissing animals as “inferior” is as arbitrary as past prejudices against women or minorities; those were once justified by superficial differences like gender or skin colour, now universally rejected. Science shows that speciesism - the assumption of human supremacy is as baseless as it is cruel, as Darwin insisted, evolution has non hierarchically connected all life. To act ethically, we must recognise that intelligence or speech does not confer greater value on one species ensured common descent and shared sentence demand that humans and animals are likely to be treated with respect and care. Co-Existence: When Man Learns to Live, Not Rule Human civilisation has always been defined by its relationship with nature. From early cave
45 Katsnelson, A. (2022, April 8). How do we know what emotions animals feel?. Science News.
46 “Evolution of sexual cooperation from sexual conflict,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Oct. 14, 2019.
paintings that celebrated animals as sacred companions in life to industrial revolutions that reduced that compassion to mere resources for consumption. Today, at the heart of the conflict between humans and animals lies not just a question of survival, but one of values: will humans continue the path of barbaric domination, or will we embrace humanity and coexistence? The greatest mistake humanity makes is assuming that it can pick and choose which parts of nature to tolerate and which to eradicate. When stray dogs overpopulate an area, they are viewed as threats and relocated or, to some extent, killed. When monkeys raid fields, temples and other human settlements, they are labelled as pests and sterilised. When leopards wander into cities, they are caged and punished. This mindset treats nature as a nuisance when inconvenient, and as a commodity when profitable.
Nature cannot be fragmented according to human convenience. It is an indivisible whole, where every creature, big or small, plays a role in maintaining ecological balance. To remove any element arbitrarily is to weaken the entire structure upon which life depends. History has shown that whenever man attempts to eradicate or dominate a part of nature, dangerous consequences follow. Tomorrow, if humans find mosquitoes inconvenient, they may attempt their eradication, not realising that these insects form the base of countless food chains. The cycle of selfish interference is a loop, unless humanity learns that peaceful coexistence is not just ethical, but it is practical. To move beyond this hypocrisy, the foundation must be a shift in attitude from selfishness to selflessness.
A society that sterilises dogs without ensuring whether they are fed or treated, or the society that drives monkeys out of cities without protecting their forest habitats, is not solving a problem but displacing it. Each conflict is man-made, and thus its solution must be man’s responsibility, not a non-human animal’s punishment.
Bibliography
1) Darlim, S. (2024b, January 16). Animal Rights Movement: Understanding when and why
it started. Animal Charity Evaluators.
2) Lewis, P. M. (2017, September 12). Response and responsibility: Humans as apex predators
and ethical actors in a changing societal environment - sciencedirect.
3) Bleier, M. (2021, July). Should we bother to practice ecological responsibility?
4) Human-wildlife conflict: Terms & definitions. IFAW. (2024, February 2).
5) Dewangan, V. (2022, July 17). Animal welfare. Whitefield Rising.
6) Sandesh, P. (2025, February 15). Budget for Animal Husbandry and dairying (2025-26):
Analysis. Budget for Animal Husbandry and Dairying (2025-26): Analysis Pashu Sandesh.
7) Shukla , A. (2025, August 12). ABC sterilisation only solution, plan for shelters is flawed:
Delhi News - Times of India. The Times of India.
8) Meenakshi Sinha / TNN / Jun 23, 2024. (2024). Noida: Sector 117 residents oppose Animal
Shelter on vacant plot: Noida News - Times of India. The Times of India.
9) Ghosh , S. (2019, February 7). With increasing human encroachment, wild animals have
nowhere to go. Newslaundry.
10) Choksi , M. (2012, May 12). Unfinished business at Powai Lake: Mumbai News - Times
of India. The Times of India.
11) Ghosh , S. (2019, February 7). With increasing human encroachment, wild animals have
nowhere to go. Newslaundry. 12) Akashdeep Virk / Jul 09, 2025. Thoroughbreds wait their turn as city plans first state-ofthe-art vet facility: Chandigarh News - Times of India. The Times of India
13) Dalrymple, S. (2022). Are humans separate from nature? - bes. British Ecological Society.
14) Science, W. I. of. (2023, February 27). The weight of responsibility: Biomass of livestock
dwarfs that of wild mammals.
15) Vu, L., & Nair, D. (2025). India accelerates progress on one health: A critical step in
pandemic preparedness. World Bank Blogs.
16) Silver, L. (2023, February 9). Key facts as India surpasses China as the world’s most
populous country. Pew Research Center.
17) S., Neelannavar, & Kulkarni, Arunkumar. (2025). Challenges and changes in urban slums
in India: A review approach. International Journal of Southern Economic Light.
18) Drishti IAS. (2023, December 6). NCRB’s crime in India 2022 report.
19) Tandon, A. (2025, September 2). Street dogs in the spotlight as rabies eradication deadline
comes closer. Mongabay.
20) PIB Delhi. (2022, March 15). Press Information Bureau. STRAY ANIMALS.
21) Gupta, A. (2025, August 21). Monkeys and cities: The urban wildlife syndrome. Wildlife
SOS.
22) Sreekandan, N. (2025, August 30). Does India have a stray dog epidemic?. Al Jazeera.
23) Borkataki, Sanku & Katoch, Rajesh & Goswami, Pankaj & Godara, R. & Khajuria, JK &
Yadav, Anish & Kaur, R. (2013). Prevalence of parasitic infections of stray cats in Jammu, India. Sokoto Journal of Veterinary Sciences. 11. 10.4314/sokjvs.v11i1.1.
24) Sharma, V., Sharma, R., Aulakh, R. S., & Singh, B. B. (2023). Prevalence of Brucella
species in stray cattle, dogs and cats: A systematic review. Preventive veterinary medicine, 219, 106017
25) The prevention of cruelty to animals act, 1960.
26) Animal Birth Control (dogs) rules, 2001 the Gazette of India.
27) Ashima Sharma, B. M. U. (2025, September 7). Do animals have rights? the SC ruling on
stray dogs shows why this needs to change.
28) Bakshi, G. K. (2025, August 23). Supreme Court directs shifting of all stray dogs in Delhi
to dog shelters; warns persons obstructing of penal action. Live Law.
29) Coolgeography. UIC - Mumbai - See Challenges. Coolgeography.
30) Article 19: Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.. Constitution of
India. (2023, June 2).
31) PRS Legislative Research. (2025, September 10). Migration in India and the impact of the
lockdown on migrants. PRS Legislative Research.
32) Biswas, S. (2014, November 14). India’s Dark History of Sterilisation. BBC News.
33) Article 48A: Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and
wild life. Constitution of India. (2023b, April 3).
34) Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, (2014) 7 SCC 547
35) State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti KureshiKassabJamat and Others, (2005), 8 S.C.C 534.
36) Article 14: Equality Before Law. Constitution of India. (2023a, April 14).
37) AIR 1952 SC 75
38) Garg, R. (2022, July 24). A company is an artificial person created by law. iPleaders
39) Lo, S. (2019, June 26). What is a legal person? law dictionary corrects decades-old error.
Nonhuman Rights Project.
40) Grimm, D. (2014). Chimpanzee “personhood” fails on appeal | science | AAAS. Science.
41) Ritchie, H. (2021, August 2). How much of the world’s food production is dependent on
pollinators? Our World in Data.
42) Than, K. (2021, May 3). All species evolved from single cell, study finds. Adventure.
43) Andrews, K., & Monsó, S. (2021, March 8). Animal cognition. Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy.
44) Emory University. (2024, November 15). Scientific thought on emotions in animals.
ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 10, 2025
45) Katsnelson, A. (2022, April 8). How do we know what emotions animals feel?. Science
News.
46) “Evolution of sexual cooperation from sexual conflict,” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences Oct. 14, 2019.