Child monkey is authorities property, says Madras Excessive Courtroom

The Coimbatore-based veterinarian with the newborn monkey. File
| Photograph Credit score: Particular Association

Stating {that a} child monkey, taken care of in captivity for 10 lengthy months by a veterinarian, should be thought-about a property of the federal government underneath the provisions of the Wildlife (Safety) Act of 1972, the Madras Excessive Courtroom on Thursday (November 14, 2024) refused to grant custody of the animal to the veterinarian.

Justice C.V. Karthikeyan dismissed a writ petition filed by Coimbatore-based veterinary surgeon V. Vallaiappan and allowed the monkey, which had suffered a number of canine bites in December 2023, to be handled at Arignar Anna Anna Zoological Park (AAZP) at Vandalur in Chennai, which has state-of-the-art services.

The choose recorded the submissions of Particular Authorities Pleader (Forests) T. Seenivasan that although the veterinarian had custody of the monkey since December 4, 2023, it was nonetheless discovered to be affected by paralysis of hind limbs and abrasion wounds when it was acquired by the Forest Division officers on October 26, 2024.

A radiography of the vertebra revealed previous fracture of three coccygeal vertebrae and proper distal tibia, and hemaetology revealed average degree of anaemia. Subsequently, a therapy protocol with every day dressing of wounds with collagen and topical antibiotics was carried out for the newborn monkey twice a day, the SGP mentioned.

He mentioned the monkey was additionally made to put on toddler diapers to keep away from soiling and marking of physique with excreta, and lengthy performing parenteral antibiotics have been administered as soon as in three days. “Now, the monkey is consuming effectively and has placed on round 100 g of weight after it had come to the Vandalur zoo,” the regulation officer advised the court docket.

He said that the newborn monkey was additionally being made to bear physiotherapy by dry heat formentation and passive vary of movement train twice a day, and that an skilled committee headed by the Deputy Director of AAZP had been constituted to constantly monitor the well being of the monkey.

It was additionally delivered to the discover of the court docket that the monkey had begun to socialize with the animal keepers and hospital employees at AAZP with none concern, misery, or nervousness, and that it was shifting actively across the therapy cell and cooperating with the employees for dressing and altering diapers.

After recording his submissions, the choose wrote that although the primate can be questioning why the lads in black coats and black robes have been deciding its destiny, the court docket needed to essentially take a call within the case not within the curiosity of the petitioner or the respondents however solely within the curiosity of the animal.

Since Part 39 of the 1972 Act particularly states that each wild animal bred in captivity shall be the property of the State authorities, and bearing in mind the therapy being supplied to it proper now at AAZP, the choose determined that its welfare might be ensured higher by the Forest Division officers.