Karnataka HC Quashes Case Over Alleged Cat ‘Kidnapping’, Slams Police for Wasting Resources [Read Order]

Karnataka: The Karnataka High Court has quashed a criminal case involving the alleged “kidnapping” of a pet cat named Daisy, delivering a scathing critique of the misuse of the criminal process and emphasizing the importance of protecting the justice system from frivolous complaints.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna made several observations on the case and its implications for the criminal justice system while delivering the judgment on June 10, 2025.

The court was hearing a criminal petition filed by Sri Taha Husain, challenging proceedings in C.C. No. 13477/2022, registered for offences punishable under Sections 504, 506, and 509 of the IPC. The court noted, “At the heart of this criminal litigation lies a wayward pet feline, named Daisy.”

Addressing the specific allegations, the court observed, “The 2nd respondent registers a complaint on 01-02-2022 alleging that the domesticated cat by name ‘Daisy’ went missing and it was a case of kidnapping. It is her further allegation that the cat was within the premises of the accused and had been wrongfully confined.”

The court highlighted the absurdity of the charges, stating, “The entire police machinery gets involved in the case of a missing cat, records statements of neighbours, sees CCTV footage and finds nothing, but still files a charge sheet—dropping the offences under Sections 428 and 429 of the IPC, but retaining those under Sections 504, 506, and 509.”

In a particularly strong observation, the court remarked, “It shocks the conscience of the Court as to how the jurisdictional police could have registered the complaint, as there is no offence indicated in the complaint, except a missing cat and the alleged wrongful custody of the cat in the house of the accused.”

Emphasizing broader implications for the justice system, the court declared, “It is not merely the present prosecution that warrants judicial censure—it is symptomatic of the misuse of the criminal process, where hurt feelings or robust grievances masquerade as legal wrongs.”

Issuing a stern warning about resource allocation, the court stated, “If such frivolous grievances are allowed to blossom into a full-fledged criminal trial, it would amount to nothing but wasting precious judicial time and, more gravely, diverting police resources from genuine grievances.”

The court also delivered a sharp rebuke to law enforcement, noting, “The police too deserve stern admonishing, for allowing themselves to be swept into a whimsical pursuit of justice for a cat named Daisy.”

The court further stated, “Cases of this nature should serve as a gentle, but firm, reminder to all stakeholders in the criminal justice system that the law is a solemn instrument and not a toy to be played with at the altar of personal pique.”

The court has also reserved liberty to the petitioner to initiate proceedings for malicious prosecution against the complainant, though it refrained from directing such action due to the complainant’s absence from the proceedings.

Sri G. Devaraj, Advocate, appeared for the petitioner, and Sri B.N. Jagadeesha, Additional State Public Prosecutor, appeared for the State of Karnataka.

Case Title: Sri Taha Husain vs. The State of Karnataka & Anr.

[Read Order]