Karnataka High Court Permits Chargesheet in Stray Dogs Disappearance Case
The Karnataka High Court has granted permission to the Mahadevapura Police to file a chargesheet regarding the mysterious disappearance of 21 stray dogs from the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) township in Bengaluru. This decision came during a hearing conducted by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, concerning the case Rakesh Kumar Sahu & Another v. State of Karnataka.
During the proceedings, it was revealed that the investigation into the incident had reached its conclusion, prompting the police to move forward with the chargesheet against DRDO Cleaning Supervisor T.G. Sudhakar and others. Notably, DRDO Estate Manager Rakesh Kumar Sahu, who was initially listed as accused No.1, was removed from the chargesheet. Advocate V. Vinay, representing Sahu, requested the court to acknowledge that proceedings against Sahu had been formally dropped. This was confirmed by State Public Prosecutor B.N. Jagadeesh, who stated, “DRDO Estate Manager we have left. The chargesheet is laid against DRDO Cleaning Supervisor T.G. Sudhakar and others.”
Consequently, the court allowed the chargesheet to be submitted to the relevant trial court. Meanwhile, Advocate Vaishali Hegde, representing the Assistant Director of the Animal Husbandry Division, who initially filed the complaint about the missing dogs, announced her intention to submit a protest petition under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). She expressed concerns that the chargesheet was “highly diluted” and that several legal sections were omitted. However, the bench declined her request to be added as an impleading applicant, emphasizing that the matter was a criminal petition rather than a Public Interest Litigation (PIL). “No. The impleading applicant can get the copy. This is not a PIL. I told you on the last occasion itself,” the court noted.
The case dates back to March 9, 2026, when 21 stray dogs, previously seen around the DRDO campus, were reported missing under suspicious circumstances. This led to a complaint alleging unethical removal of the animals. Initially, two DRDO estate officers and an unidentified individual were implicated in the case. The High Court had previously scrutinized the involvement of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) in the matter and had stayed the investigation against the two DRDO officials on March 25. Later, on June 23, the court allowed the investigation to proceed, offering interim protection to the officials, ensuring they were not subjected to coercive actions or harassment. The officials were also instructed to assist with the investigation to uncover the truth behind the dogs’ disappearance.
The Karnataka High Court’s decision marks a significant step in resolving the case involving the DRDO township’s missing stray dogs.
