The Delhi High Court has intervened to reunite three rescued toy Pomeranians—Mishti, Coco, and Cotton—with their adoptive parents, emphasizing that animals cannot be treated as “inanimate objects” under the law. In an order passed on April 16, the court modified a trial court ruling that had directed the dogs to be returned to their original owner on ‘superdari’ despite allegations of animal cruelty. Justice Girish Kathpalia highlighted the “emotional trauma” the animals would suffer if separated from the caregivers they have bonded with.
The case traces back to 2025, when the three female toy Pomeranians were rescued during a raid at the residence of their original owner following allegations of “deplorable conditions” and animal cruelty. Following their rescue, the dogs were placed in the care of an NGO, which subsequently facilitated their adoption.
The legal battle began when the original owner sought the return of the dogs through the trial court. In August 2025 and January 2026, the trial court passed orders granting custody to the original owner on ‘superdari’—a legal mechanism typically used for the temporary release of seized property like vehicles or electronics during a pending trial. The adoptive parents challenged these orders before the High Court, seeking to retain custody of the pets.
During the proceedings, the court focused on the unique nature of the “property” involved in this dispute. Justice Kathpalia observed that while the trial court must ultimately decide the merits of the cruelty allegations, the immediate concern was the well-being of the “voiceless animals.”
“It is explained by learned counsel for petitioners that the three pet dogs, who are the subject matter of this petition, are female toy pomeranians, named Mishti, Coco and Cotton, all of whom are identifiable, as they respond to the call by their respective name,” the court noted, acknowledging their individual identities.
The judge further remarked:
“The issue before this court is the emotional trauma which those voiceless animals would be undergoing after being separated from their adoptive parents (the present petitioners).”
The court underlined that the law must recognize the emotional bond formed between a pet and its adopter, distinguishing living beings from inanimate seized goods.
In a significant turn during the hearing, the original owner agreed to return the dogs to the adoptive parents. However, this was subject to a specific condition: should he be acquitted of the cruelty charges in the trial court, the custody of the dogs would be returned to him, provided their welfare is ensured.
The High Court modified the lower court’s order and directed the original owner to release Mishti, Coco, and Cotton to their adoptive parents by Friday. To ensure the dogs remain available for the ongoing legal proceedings, the court directed the adoptive parents to furnish a bond of ₹50,000 for each dog. This bond serves as an assurance that the dogs will be produced during the evidence stage of the trial if required.
