An All-loving Dog

 

The dogs are supposed to be unfriendly to some people, if not all, to prove their loyalty and intelligence. An all friendly dog can be more mischievous than an angrily growling one.

This spotless black Labrador, the cute and kind devil type, was equally friendly to two claimants. The angry rivals went to the police to tilt its favours in their direction. They tried their level best to use all the hallmarked attitudinal signs in a dog’s behaviour that qualify the owner-pet relationship such as wagging the tail, child-like look in the eyes, cutely protruding tongue like a child and many others.

It was inconclusive as the impish black gem showered equal affection on both parties. The police station incharge was forced to go and conduct the dog’s DNA to settle the ownership issue.

It was necessitated to go for the test in order to decide the animal’s parentage that was expected to help in deciding the issue of ownership also. The police were put in a testing situation because they found it impossible to just shoo away the case as per their whims. One party was an influential journalist; the other was an impressive political activist. The police was thus, on this rare occasion, stretched beyond its comfort zone. The issue was already well fed by the local media by now. It could no longer be whisked away like any other petty issue that plagues each nook corner in the country.

The journalist was a Muslim. Three months back he lodged an FIR that his 3-year-old Labrador pet named Choko went missing. With the police having failed to provide any lead, and the media man being pretty enthusiastic in his own investigation, the journalist reported the police a week back that he has spotted his dog at the house of the ABVP leader, the right wing students union of a powerful political party. A dispute between a Muslim journalist and an ABVP Hindu leader over a dog surely is bound to raise hackles. The left wingers also chimed in to tilt the scale away from the right wingers. Left of centre and right of centre forces also threw their stakes as per their political suitability.

There were more voices to the left and the journalist, helped by an irritated police, took possession of his dog. The story but won’t come to a happy conclusion here only. The very next day, the Hindu outfit leader reached the police station and claimed that it was his dog named Foko and he had bought it from a place named X. The rival claimant appeared full of confidence, driven by a sense of grief and anger born of losing a lovely pet.

The police station incharge faced the dilemma again. Choko or Foko was again summoned to the police station. The two rival owners again fetched all fleecing, cajoling tricks from their repertoire of pet-parentage to get the canine’s affection. The dog but appeared intent upon having two masters simultaneously and shared his affection with both of them with such canine, clinical precision that again both of them had an exact 50% share each. The dog was indisputably equally comfortable with both the owners and names.

May be it was a very smart dog. The police should have roped in a third fake claimant to see if the loyalty dribbled down to one third for all. However, police being police, they cannot be expected to act so wise. They have to act with force and intimidation. Wisdom is for the village headmen of the last century. 

The journalist said that the dog’s parent lived at a place named Y and that is where he had bought it. Since the celebrity dog was already on the front pages of the local supplements of the vernacular press, the police was in no position to hush up the case either for this party or that on the basis of their clout. An impartial enquiry brings a lot of headache to the police.

The police sent cribbing teams to both the mentioned places to collect blood samples from the supposed parents. The district veterinary doctor collected the samples. He too got a shot at duty after a long and boring hiatus. Meanwhile, since the right wingers carried a bigger administrative clout at that time, the police allowed the ABVP activist to keep the dog till the reports arrived. When questions were raised about this for-the-time-being ownership, he said he has submitted all the relevant documents such as vaccination cards to substantiate his ownership. 

The test was then supposed to possess the key to the truth.     

The animal activist group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment to Animals) also jumped into the fray. The state PETA co-ordinator blamed the police for being insensitive to the animal’s welfare for they couldn’t take proper care of him, resulting in a high fever to the dog, under which it turned angry to both parties and growled at both, thus again leaving the situation indecisive like before.

The dog now showed all cordiality with the PETA co-ordinator, who got personal with the issue and went to the extent of demanding FIR against the police for tormenting the animal. He also demanded FIR against the wrong claimant under the provisions of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. The dog thus joined inter-species bonhomie at the PETA facility. 

Presently the right of the dog centred around having its rightful owner. The reports that arrived were a shocker. Both Place X and Place Y theories were nullified. The journalist and the political activist both were equally near or far from the pet’s legal ownership now. Given their humanitarian—animalitarian rather—cause, the animal welfare body was allowed to keep the dog and put up a pet adoption advertisement whenever they felt the dog was ready to take a master.

Possibly it was an over-friendly dog with a mission of brotherhood and love for all. But then, an all loving dog creates problems also. And these are not the times for secular, unqualified, all-loving affections.