In a shocking turn of events, a dog bite case led to the cancellation of the Sindh Assembly seat of Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari’s sister, highlighting the terrible toll that such incidents can take on lives and legal standing in Pakistan. Is Pakistani law clear about who is liable for dog bites? This blog answers the question: “Dog bite laws in Pakistan: Who is liable in 2025?”

Types of Dogs Recognized by Pakistani Law:

There are two types of dogs recognized under Pakistani law:

1. Pet Dogs (Owned Dogs):

Pet dogs are legally recognized as the responsibility of their owners under Articles 138, 139, 140, and 141 of the Police Order, 2002. If a pet dog bites someone, the owner can be held liable, and the victim has the right to take legal action against the owner. Under these provisions, the owner is responsible for ensuring that their dog does not cause harm to other people.

2. Stray Dogs:

Sections 289 and 290 of the Pakistan Penal Code deal with stray dogs whose owners are not identified. In such cases, the onus of responsibility falls on the local government agencies that manage and control the stray dog ​​population. Legal action can be taken by victims of stray dog ​​bites to hold the responsible municipal authorities accountable for their mishandling of the stray dog ​​problem.

RELATED: Laws that Protect Animals Worldwide in 2025

Legal Provisions for Pet Dog Bites:

Articles 138 to 141 of the Police Order, 2002, set out the legal framework in Pakistan relating to pet dogs. According to these sections, dog owners have a duty to keep their animals under control and ensure that they do not cause harm to other people. If someone is bitten by a pet dog, they have the right to lodge a complaint against the owner with the local police or other relevant authorities. The law mandates that dog owners take appropriate protective measures to prevent attacks, such as restraining their pets.

Legal action can be taken by victims to recover damages or losses caused by dog ​​bites. The importance of the owner’s liability under these provisions is highlighted by the fact that, despite the lack of documented case studies, courts have held dog owners liable for negligence in some cases.

The bare language of these Articles is given below:

Article: 138

Causing mischief in street by animal or vehicle.- No person shall cause damage, injury, danger, alarm or mischief in any street or public place by negligent or reckless driving or by driving any vehicle or animal laden with timber, poles or other unwieldy articles through a street or public place contrary to any regulation.

Article: 139

Causing obstruction in a street.- No person shall cause obstruction in any street or public place- (a) by allowing any animal or vehicle, which has to be loaded or unloaded, or take up or set down passengers, to remain or stand in the street or the public place longer than may be necessary for such purpose; or (b) by leaving any vehicle standing or fastening any cattle in the street or the public place; or (c) by using any part of a street or public place as a halting place for vehicles or cattle; or (d) by causing obstruction in any other manner.

Article: 140

Willful or negligent conduct in respect of dogs.- No person shall in any street or public place – (a) let loose any dog willfully or negligently so as to cause danger, injury, alarm or annoyance; or (b) suffer a ferocious dog to be at large without a muzzle; or (c) set on a dog to attack any person or horse or other animal.

Article: 141

Penalty for offences under Articles 138 to 140.- Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of Articles 138 to 140 shall, on conviction, be punished with fine, which may extend to ten thousand rupees, or, in default of payment, with imprisonment for a term not exceeding thirty days.

Legal Provisions for Stray Dog Bites:

Sections 289 and 290 of the Pakistan Penal Code deal with stray dogs and the harm they may cause. According to these laws, municipal authorities are responsible for managing the stray dog ​​population and must take proactive measures to prevent attacks. Victims of stray dog ​​bites can take legal action against municipal authorities for their negligence or failure to control the problem.

However, such cases against municipal authorities can be challenging due to bureaucratic delays, lack of clear enforcement mechanisms, and the difficulty of establishing negligence. Despite these obstacles, victims have the right to complain and demand accountability under these provisions, which highlight the need for better management of stray animals for public safety.

The bare language of these sections is given below:

Section 289:

Negligent conduct with respect to animal: Whoever, knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any animal in his possession as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life, or any probable danger of grievous hurt from such animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to [three thousand rupees], or with both.

Section 290:

Punishment for public nuisance in cases not otherwise provided for: Whoever commits a public nuisance in any case not otherwise punishable by this Code, shall be punished with fine which may extend to [six hundred rupees].

Conclusion:

Liability for dog bites in Pakistan is largely determined by whether the dog is a stray or an owned one. Municipal authorities are liable for managing stray dogs under the Pakistan Penal Code, while pet dog owners are directly accountable under the Police Order 2002. However, due to enforcement issues and legal ambiguity, victims often struggle to obtain justice. Educating the public about these laws is crucial to preventing dog bite incidents. It is equally important for authorities to strengthen enforcement and implement effective public safety measures to reduce risks and ensure accountability.