Animal Welfare Law in Bangladesh: Cruelty, Wildlife and Compliance in 2026

Animal welfare law in Bangladesh: the 2026 framework

Animal welfare law in Bangladesh rests on a modern statute with an old-fashioned enforcement problem. The Animal Welfare Act 2019 replaced the colonial Cruelty to Animals Act 1920 and treats animals as beings that deserve protection for their own sake, not merely as property with economic value.[1] [5] Yet viral videos of dogs hanged from trees and puppies drowned in ponds still end, more often than not, without a conviction. The gap is not in the list of offences. It is in who may start a case, how the police may act and which court hears it.

This guide explains how the law actually works in 2026: the offences and penalties under the 2019 Act, the gatekeeping role of the Department of Livestock Services, the overlap with the Penal Code, the new wildlife ordinance issued in January 2026, the court orders on stray dogs, and the compliance duties that fall on farms, pet businesses, slaughterhouses and importers. It is written for complainants, animal welfare organisations, businesses and their advisers who need to know what will move a case forward and what will stall it.

Summary: The Animal Welfare Act 2019 makes cruelty, poisoning, mutilation, killing ownerless animals and unregistered commercial pet breeding offences punishable by up to two years' imprisonment or a fine of up to Tk 50,000. Courts can take cognisance only on a written complaint from the Department of Livestock Services, and the offences are non-cognisable and bailable, so most successful cases combine the Act with the Penal Code or a mobile court. Wildlife is governed separately by the Wildlife (Conservation and Security) Ordinance 2026.

Key point: The single most important practical fact is section 18: no court may try an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2019 without a written complaint from the "authority", meaning the Director General of the Department of Livestock Services or a veterinary surgeon he authorises. A complainant who goes straight to court under the Act alone is likely to be turned away.

At a glance

Swipe or scroll →

Table of Contents

Animal welfare law in Bangladesh: the 2026 framework

There is no single animal code. The framework is a set of statutes, each built around a different purpose, and a practitioner has to know which one fits the animal and the conduct before deciding where to go.

• Animal Welfare Act 2019. The general welfare statute for domestic, working, farmed and ownerless animals. It covers most mammals, birds, reptiles and aquatic animals, but excludes humans and fish.[3]
• Wildlife (Conservation and Security) Ordinance 2026. Protects wild species listed in its schedules and regulates possession, trade and protected areas. It replaced the Wildlife (Conservation and Security) Act 2012.[9]
• Penal Code 1860. Section 429 punishes killing or harming an animal worth Tk 50 or more with up to five years' imprisonment, and section 428 has also been used in recent cases.[6] [7]
• Animal health and food statutes. The Animal Diseases Act 2005, the Quarantine of Animal and Animal Products Act 2005 and the Animal Slaughter and Meat Quality Control Act 2011 govern disease control, imports and slaughter.[14]

Above them sits Article 18A of the Constitution, which directs the state to protect the environment, biodiversity and wildlife.[7] It is not directly enforceable as a fundamental right, but it gives weight to public interest writ petitions and shapes how the High Court Division reads the statutes.

The Animal Welfare Act 2019

The Act is the backbone of animal welfare law in Bangladesh. It was passed by Parliament in July 2019, when the government presented it as a replacement for the 1920 law.[2] Its 24 sections set out the duties of owners and custodians, rules on keeping, transport and slaughter, the core cruelty offences, protection of ownerless animals, registration of commercial pet breeding, inspection and seizure powers, penalties, corporate liability, cognisance and mobile court jurisdiction.[1]

Duties of owners and custodians

Section 4 places a positive duty of care on the owner or custodian of an animal, and section 5 allows rules on keeping, transport and slaughter.[1] In practice the duty is read with the cruelty offences: failing to provide humane care, or causing illness by action or inaction, is itself treated as cruelty.[3] For businesses, this means welfare is not only about avoiding active harm. Inadequate housing, food, water or veterinary care can create liability on its own.

What counts as cruelty under section 6

Section 6 lists the conduct that amounts to unnecessary cruelty. The categories include overworking an animal, beating it unnecessarily, denying food or water or forcing excess intake, tying or confining it so it cannot stand, sit or lie naturally, striking it with sharp metal objects, releasing a sick animal into a populated area to die, organising fights or baiting, and forcing drugs or harmful substances into it.[3] [4]

The list continues with offences that matter to pet owners and businesses: keeping a dog tied or confined for more than 24 hours without exercise, leaving a pet confined and unattended for an unnecessary period, selling an injured animal without treatment, breeding an animal that a veterinary surgeon has declared unfit, using animals as targets and using animals for entertainment or sport without permission. Aiding any of these acts is also an offence.[3]

Critics point out that the drafting leaves key words undefined. Section 6 penalises "unnecessarily" overworking an animal without setting a standard of necessary labour, and section 8 prohibits an "excessive" load on draught animals without explaining how excess is measured.[5] For a prosecution, that means veterinary evidence on the specific animal is usually indispensable.

Ownerless animals under section 7

Section 7(1) provides that ownerless animals may not be killed or removed except for the reasons the Act lists, and section 7(2) makes killing an ownerless animal an offence.[4] This is the provision that makes culling and relocation of street dogs and cats unlawful, and it is the basis of most of the public interest litigation discussed below. Commentators note that the Act protects both owned and unowned animals and bars culling, removal or relocation without a lawful reason.[6]

Mutilation, poisoning, transport and performing animals

Separate sections deal with mutilation (section 10), poisoning (section 11), use of animals in transport (section 8) and performing animals (section 12).[1] Poisoning that causes death or permanent injury, using an unfit animal for transport, and overloading a working animal are each offences.[3] Section 9 requires registration of commercial pet breeding and management, and running a commercial breeding farm without registration is an offence.[1] [3]

Exemptions

Three exemptions recur. Slaughter or sacrifice according to religious practice is not cruelty. Recognised education and research are exempt. And an authorised body may kill an animal with a confirmed incurable and transmissible disease, such as rabies, by a painless method in line with international animal health guidance.[2] [3] The rabies exemption is narrow: it is not a licence for general culling of dogs that are merely suspected of being dangerous.

Penalties under animal welfare law in Bangladesh and how cases proceed

Penalties under section 16 range from six months to two years' imprisonment, a fine of Tk 10,000 to Tk 50,000, or both.[3] At the lower end, a first offence of cruelty or killing an ownerless animal carries up to six months, a fine of up to Tk 10,000, or both.[4] At the upper end, mutilating an animal or killing it with poison carries up to two years, a fine of Tk 50,000, or both.[2] Section 17 extends liability to companies and other bodies.[1]

The section 18 bottleneck

Section 18 is where most cases under animal welfare law in Bangladesh stall. A court may take cognisance of an offence only on a written complaint from the "authority", defined in section 2(4) as the Director General of the Department of Livestock Services or a veterinary surgeon he authorises.[6] Ordinary citizens and animal welfare organisations therefore cannot file a case directly under the Act; they must persuade the livestock authority to do so.[3] Academic commentators describe this as a procedural bottleneck that discourages whistleblowing.[5]

The bottleneck is not insurmountable. In the Ishwardi case of December 2025, where eight newborn puppies were found drowned in a pond at a government residence, the upazila livestock officer filed a case at the local police station on 2 December 2025 following an instruction from the adviser to the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, and an arrest followed the next day.[6] The lesson is that public attention and a prompt, well-documented approach to the upazila livestock officer can unlock the section 18 complaint quickly.

Non-cognisable and bailable offences

Offences under the Act are non-cognisable and bailable, so the police cannot arrest without a warrant or investigate without the court's permission.[4] In practice this slows everything down. It also explains why many complainants combine the Act with Penal Code section 429, which carries up to five years and is cognisable, though still bailable, and does not depend on the livestock authority's complaint.[6]

The difficulty with section 429 is valuation: it requires proof that the animal was worth at least Tk 50, which is awkward to establish for an ownerless animal.[6] In a December 2025 Chattogram case involving a pregnant dog run over by a vehicle, a court case was eventually filed under Penal Code section 428 and section 98 of the Road Transport Act.[7]

Mobile courts

Section 20 brings offences under the Act within mobile court jurisdiction.[1] Mobile courts are fast but lenient. In July 2025, after a stray dog was hanged and beaten to death in Bakerganj, Barishal, a mobile court run by the Assistant Commissioner (Land) fined the adult offender Tk 5,000, and three minors involved were released to their guardians on a bond.[4] A mobile court disposes of the matter on the spot, which removes the prospect of a heavier sentence later. Complainants who want a deterrent outcome should weigh that trade-off before asking the executive magistrate to act.

The evidence problem

Animal welfare advocates report that a veterinary surgeon typically needs to examine the body and certify an abnormal death before a prosecution can proceed, which is impractical when a carcass has been buried or disposed of.[4] There is also no dedicated enforcement unit, and the Animal Welfare Board contemplated by the Act has not been formed, leaving complaint routes unclear.[3] [4] Good evidence is therefore everything: video with metadata, the names of witnesses, the location, and a veterinary examination as early as possible.

Wildlife protection in 2026

Wild animals fall outside the ordinary reach of the 2019 Act's enforcement model and inside a separate, much tougher wildlife regime. On 4 December 2025 the interim government's advisory council approved a Wildlife (Conservation and Security) Ordinance to replace the 2012 Act, and the ordinance took effect in January 2026.[8] [9]

Schedules and protected species

The schedules protect 1,599 species of plants and animals in total. Schedule 1(a) covers tigers and elephants as flagship species, Schedule 1(b) lists 250 further species and Schedule 1(c) 127, Schedule 2 lists 1,207 species, Schedule 3 lists 15 rat species that farmers may chase away, and Schedule 4 lists 100 tree species.[8] Killing a Schedule 1(a) or 1(b) animal is now a cognisable and non-bailable offence, a significant change from the 2012 Act, under which only tigers and elephants had that status.[8]

Penalties and enforcement powers

Killing a tiger or elephant carries two to seven years' imprisonment and a fine of Tk 1 lakh to Tk 10 lakh, rising to 12 years and Tk 15 lakh for a repeat offence. Possessing a tiger or elephant trophy, meat or body part without permission carries up to five years.[9] Forest officers may arrest offenders without a magistrate's order, and officers of the police, customs, Coast Guard and Border Guard of specified ranks may arrest without a warrant for cognisable offences.[8] [9] Convicted persons may appeal within 30 days.[9]

Online trade, cruelty content and compensation

Two provisions are particularly relevant in 2026. Advertising wildlife for sale on social media and posting videos of cruelty to wildlife are offences, and owning or trading wildlife or trophies without a licence or possession certificate is prohibited.[9] The ordinance also commits the government to compensate people for injury or property loss caused by wildlife attacks, and it creates a Wildlife Trust Fund, a scientific committee that acts as the CITES authority and a wildlife crime control unit at airports and ports.[9] Compensation for wildlife damage is already being paid: the Forest Department paid Tk 4.35 lakh to eleven people whose crops were damaged by wild elephants.[6]

Ordinances made by the interim government had to be placed before the new Parliament, so check the current enacted text and section numbering on the official laws portal before relying on a specific provision. Pet traders who deal in exotic birds, reptiles or primates should treat the wildlife law, not the 2019 Act, as their main compliance risk. TRW's CITES and wildlife trade permits practice advises on licensing and possession certificates.

Stray dogs and animal welfare law in Bangladesh

No issue generates more heat under animal welfare law in Bangladesh than street dogs. Every few years, a spike in dog bites or a fatal rabies case prompts calls for culling or mass relocation, and every few years the legal answer is the same.

The court orders

In 2014, on a writ petition filed by the Obhoyaronno-Bangladesh Animal Welfare Foundation, the High Court Division issued a rule banning dog culling as well as bullfights, cockfights and goat fights, and the Chattogram City Corporation has acknowledged that the order prevents it from culling dogs.[10] In 2020, after a further writ petition by an animal welfare organisation, the High Court Division ruled against dog culling and Dhaka City Corporation committed to a programme of neutering and vaccinating neighbourhood dogs.[6] Section 7 of the 2019 Act adds a statutory prohibition on killing or removing ownerless animals.[4]

Catch, neuter, vaccinate, release

Catch, Neuter, Vaccinate, Release is the government-approved and internationally recognised method of managing street dogs: dogs are captured, sterilised and vaccinated against rabies, then returned to their territory. When campaigns calling for culling resurfaced in June 2026, animal welfare groups formed a human chain at Dhaka University citing the 2014 directive and sections 6 and 7 of the 2019 Act and calling for nationwide expansion of the programme.[11] Coverage remains uneven, and commentators attribute the gaps to shortfalls in budget, training and coordination.[6]

What this means for city corporations, housing societies and employers

A city corporation, a housing society committee, a factory compound manager or a university administration that orders dogs poisoned, removed or dumped is exposed to criminal complaints under section 7 and to contempt or writ proceedings. The lawful route is to engage the local government's vaccination and sterilisation programme, record bite incidents, and, where a specific animal has a confirmed transmissible disease, involve the authorised body under the narrow rabies exemption. Building managers should put that policy in writing, because staff acting on informal instructions are the ones who end up named in the complaint.

Public interest litigation for animals

Because animals have no legal personality and cannot sue, writ petitions under Article 102 are brought by people and organisations on their behalf.[5] The High Court Division has been receptive. In February 2024, on a petition by actor Jaya Ahsan and the People for Animal Welfare Foundation citing the wildlife law and the 2019 Act, it issued a rule asking why steps should not be taken to stop cruelty to elephants in the name of training, and stayed new licences and renewals for keeping elephants for the interim period.[12]

Public interest litigation works best when it targets a systemic practice of a public body, rather than an individual act of cruelty that belongs in a criminal court. A strong petition identifies the statutory duty, shows the authority's failure with documents and photographs, names every responsible respondent and asks for specific, supervisable directions. Our guides to writ petitions in Bangladesh and environmental litigation explain standing, procedure and remedies.

How to make a complaint that goes somewhere

Most complaints under animal welfare law in Bangladesh fail for practical rather than legal reasons. The sequence below reflects how matters move in practice.

Swipe or scroll →

Two points are easy to miss. First, decide early whether to pursue a mobile court, a criminal case under the Act through the livestock authority, a Penal Code case through the police, or more than one of these, because a quick mobile court fine can close the door on a heavier sentence. Second, keep the original video file, not only a social media upload, because metadata and continuity of evidence matter if the case is contested.

Compliance for farms, pet businesses and slaughterhouses

For businesses, animal welfare law in Bangladesh is mainly a licensing and inspection issue, with criminal exposure in the background. Section 13 of the 2019 Act provides for inspection, section 14 allows the authority to take custody of and destroy distressed animals, and section 15 allows seizure, treatment and care of seized animals.[1] Section 17 makes companies and other bodies liable for offences.[1]

Pet shops and breeders

Commercial pet breeding and management must be registered under section 9, and operating without registration is an offence.[3] Pet shops face specific risk under the cruelty provisions on selling injured animals without treatment, leaving animals confined and unattended and breeding animals declared unfit.[3] A shop selling wild-caught birds or reptiles is also exposed under the wildlife ordinance, which prohibits trading wildlife without a licence and bans sale at markets and advertising on social media.[9]

Livestock and poultry farms

Farms carry welfare duties under sections 4 to 6 of the 2019 Act and disease-control duties under the Animal Diseases Act 2005, which requires isolation of infected animals, burial or disposal of dead or suspect animals, reporting of disease and restrictions on infected areas, and bars the sale of infected animals or their products.[14] Confinement systems deserve particular attention, because tying or confining an animal so it cannot stand, sit or lie down naturally is listed cruelty.[3]

Slaughterhouses and meat processors

The Animal Slaughter and Meat Quality Control Act 2011 requires a veterinary official or veterinarian to decide whether a carcass is wholly or partly unfit for consumption.[14] Religious slaughter is not cruelty under the 2019 Act, but rough handling, overcrowded transport and holding animals without food and water before slaughter can still be offences.[2] [3]

Importers and exporters

Live animal and animal product imports are governed by the Quarantine of Animal and Animal Products Act 2005, which allows the government to restrict entry and require disinfection, isolation and quarantine.[14] On 24 June 2026 the Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock released a revised draft Animal and Animal Product Quarantine Act 2026 to replace it, extending controls to semen, embryos and biologics, raising penalties and shortening appeal periods; public comments closed on 15 July 2026.[13] TRW's animal quarantine and import practice and agribusiness and food practice advise on these regimes.

On a phone, scroll the table sideways. The practical rule is to map each animal in the business to the statute that governs it, then build an inspection-ready file: registrations, veterinary records, mortality logs, transport records and staff training.

Three scenarios: how matters unfold in practice

A neighbour poisons street dogs

Poisoning that causes death is an offence under the 2019 Act, and killing an ownerless animal is a separate offence under section 7.[3] [4] The realistic path is to get a carcass to a government veterinary hospital the same day, obtain a written finding, and take that report with witness statements to the upazila livestock officer with a request for a section 18 complaint. In parallel, a General Diary entry at the police station records the incident. Expect the accused to obtain bail; the objective is a conviction and a record, not pre-trial detention.

A pet shop is reported for keeping sick animals

For the shop, the first questions are whether its breeding operation is registered under section 9 and whether any animal on the premises is wildlife rather than domestic stock.[3] [9] Inspectors can seize animals for treatment and care, so a shop should have veterinary records, isolation space and a documented treatment protocol ready before anyone arrives.[1] A single exotic bird without a possession certificate can turn a modest welfare inspection into a non-bailable wildlife case.

A housing society wants the dogs gone

Committees often ask security staff or a contractor to remove dogs at night. That instruction exposes both the committee members and the staff under section 7, and the court orders on culling make an "administrative decision" defence unpersuasive.[4] [10] The defensible course is to request vaccination and sterilisation from the city corporation, keep a bite register, and manage feeding points. Under animal welfare law in Bangladesh, prevention and documentation protect the committee far better than removal.

Common mistakes and how to avoid them

• Going straight to court under the 2019 Act. Without the livestock authority's written complaint, the court cannot take cognisance. Approach the upazila livestock officer first.[6]
• Relying on a social media post. Outrage brings attention, but prosecutors need the original file, witnesses and a veterinary report.
• Accepting a mobile court fine without thinking. A Tk 5,000 fine on the spot resolves the matter, sometimes for an act that could have attracted imprisonment.[4]
• Confusing wildlife and domestic animals. A parakeet, monitor lizard or monkey is likely to be a wildlife case with far tougher penalties and different enforcement officers.[8]
• Treating culling as an administrative decision. Section 7 and the court orders make killing or relocating ownerless animals unlawful, whoever gives the instruction.[4] [10]

What to watch in 2026 and beyond

Pressure to amend the 2019 Act is building. A lawyer's legal notice to the government has asked it to make offences cognisable and increase penalties, and commentators continue to criticise section 18 and the absence of a functioning Animal Welfare Board.[3] [5] The wildlife ordinance's provisions on online trade and cruelty content will be tested in the first prosecutions, and the draft quarantine law will reshape import compliance once it is finalised.[9] [13] Animal welfare law in Bangladesh is moving in one direction: towards more enforcement, higher penalties and greater scrutiny of businesses that handle animals.

TRW advises animal welfare organisations, farms, pet businesses, importers and public bodies on compliance, complaints, prosecutions and public interest litigation. Explore our environmental compliance practice or contact our Dhaka team.

Frequently asked questions

What is the main animal welfare law in Bangladesh?

The Animal Welfare Act 2019 (Act No. 12 of 2019), which replaced the Cruelty to Animals Act 1920 and protects owned and ownerless animals from cruelty.[1]

What is the punishment for animal cruelty?

Between six months and two years' imprisonment, a fine of Tk 10,000 to Tk 50,000, or both, depending on the offence. Mutilation and poisoning sit at the top of the range.[2] [3]

Can I file an animal cruelty case myself?

Not directly under the 2019 Act. A court takes cognisance only on a written complaint from the Director General of the Department of Livestock Services or an authorised veterinary surgeon, so complain to the upazila livestock officer. A Penal Code complaint can be made to the police.[6]

Is killing a stray dog illegal in Bangladesh?

Yes. Section 7 of the Animal Welfare Act 2019 makes killing an ownerless animal an offence and prohibits removing one except for reasons the Act allows.[4]

Can a city corporation cull or relocate street dogs?

No. A 2014 High Court Division rule banned dog culling, a 2020 ruling went the same way, and the 2019 Act prohibits killing or removing ownerless animals. Vaccination and sterilisation are the accepted approach.[6] [10] [11]

Can the police arrest someone for animal cruelty?

Not without a warrant under the 2019 Act, because its offences are non-cognisable and bailable. Penal Code section 429 is cognisable, and killing protected wildlife under the 2026 ordinance is cognisable and non-bailable.[4] [6] [8]

What is the penalty for killing a tiger or elephant?

Two to seven years' imprisonment and a fine of Tk 1 lakh to Tk 10 lakh, rising to 12 years and Tk 15 lakh for a repeat offence.[9]

Do pet breeders need a licence?

Commercial pet breeding and management must be registered under section 9 of the 2019 Act, and breeding without registration is an offence.[1] [3]

Is it illegal to sell wild animals or birds online?

Yes. The Wildlife (Conservation and Security) Ordinance 2026 makes advertising wildlife for sale on social media an offence and bans trading wildlife without a licence or possession certificate.[9]

Is religious slaughter affected by the Animal Welfare Act?

Slaughter or sacrifice according to religious practice is not cruelty under the Act, though handling, transport and holding conditions remain subject to its cruelty provisions.[2] [3]