Delhi High Court Orders Inspection Of Preclinical Drug Testing Facility In PETA's Plea Alleging Animal Abuse
The Delhi High Court has constituted a three-member team to conduct inspections of a preclinical drug testing facility involving large and small animals, including beagle dogs, mini pigs etc.The direction was passed by Justice Sachin Datta on a petition moved by animal welfare organisation PETA, alleging abuse and neglect of animals by the facility, particularly beagles, while carrying...
The Delhi High Court has constituted a three-member team to conduct inspections of a preclinical drug testing facility involving large and small animals, including beagle dogs, mini pigs etc.
The direction was passed by Justice Sachin Datta on a petition moved by animal welfare organisation PETA, alleging abuse and neglect of animals by the facility, particularly beagles, while carrying out experiments.
PETA submitted that a Multi-Disciplinary Expert Committee constituted by the Committee For Control And Supervision Of Experiments On Animals (CCSEA) had earlier corroborated the allegations. However, a subsequent inspection committee appointed by the Court returned starkly contrasting findings.
The High Court noted that the subsequent inspection was mired in controversy inasmuch serious allegations of 'conflict of interest' were levelled against the Local Commissioner appointed therein (though he did not ultimately participate in the inspection).
As such, the Court has constituted a fresh team comprising (i) Member of CCSEA, (ii) Principal Scientist CCMB (Centre for Cellular & Molecular Biology), Hyderabad, and (iii) a Local Commissioner.
Upon conclusion of the inspection, a report will be provided to PETA as well as CCSEA, which functions under the Ministry of Animal Husbandry.
Significant to note that PETA has sought revocation of the facility's licenses and registrations and rehabilitation of the animals housed at the facility.
However, the Court has ordered that upon receipt of the inspection report, CCSEA will take cognizance of any deficiencies in the facility and shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
“The respondent no.2 (facility) shall also take immediate rectificatory steps as may be warranted in terms of the inspection report and/or directions issued by the respondent no.1,” it added and closed the plea.
Appearance: Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Pritha Srikumar, Ms. Arunima Kedia, Ms. Meghna Sharma, Ms. Saumya Sinha and Mr. W. Wasin, Advocates for Petitioner; Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC along with Mr. Shivam Tiwari, Ms. Priya, Ms. Robina and Mr. Anubhav Tyagi (GP), Advocates. Mr. Vivek Kohli, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. S. Santanam Swaminadhin, Mr. Kartik Malhotra, Mr. A. Mandal, Ms. Vasudha Chadha, Advocates for R-2.
Case title: PETA v. Committee For Control And Supervision Of Experiments On Animals (CCSEA), Ministry Of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry And Dairying, Government Of India Through Its Chairman & Anr.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1129
Case no.: W.P.(C) 9350/2025