US Laws, Codes, Statutes & Cases

      Sec. 53-247. Cruelty to animals. Animals engaged in exhibition of fighting. Intentional injury or killing of police animals or dogs in volunteer canine search and rescue teams. (a) Any person who overdrives, drives when overloaded, overworks, tortures, deprives of necessary sustenance, mutilates or cruelly beats or kills or unjustifiably injures any animal, or who, having impounded or confined any animal, fails to give such animal proper care or neglects to cage or restrain any such animal from doing injury to itself or to another animal or fails to supply any such animal with wholesome air, food and water, or unjustifiably administers any poisonous or noxious drug or substance to any domestic animal or unjustifiably exposes any such drug or substance, with intent that the same shall be taken by an animal, or causes it to be done, or, having charge or custody of any animal, inflicts cruelty upon it or fails to provide it with proper food, drink or protection from the weather or abandons it or carries it or causes it to be carried in a cruel manner, or fights with or baits, harasses or worries any animal for the purpose of making it perform for amusement, diversion or exhibition, shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than one year or both.

      (b) Any person who maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates, tortures, wounds or kills an animal shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years or both. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to any licensed veterinarian while following accepted standards of practice of the profession or to any person while following approved methods of slaughter under section 22-272a, while performing medical research as an employee of, student in or person associated with any hospital, educational institution or laboratory, while following generally accepted agricultural practices or while lawfully engaged in the taking of wildlife.

      (c) Any person who knowingly (1) owns, possesses, keeps or trains an animal engaged in an exhibition of fighting for amusement or gain, (2) possesses, keeps or trains an animal with the intent that it be engaged in an exhibition of fighting for amusement or gain, (3) permits an act described in subdivision (1) or (2) of this subsection to take place on premises under his control, (4) acts as judge or spectator at an exhibition of animal fighting for amusement or gain, or (5) bets or wagers on the outcome of an exhibition of animal fighting for amusement or gain, shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years or both.

      (d) Any person who intentionally injures any animal while such animal is in the performance of its duties under the supervision of a peace officer, as defined in section 53a-3, or intentionally injures a dog that is a member of a volunteer canine search and rescue team, as defined in section 5-249, while such dog is in the performance of its duties under the supervision of the active individual member of such team, shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years or both.

      (e) Any person who intentionally kills any animal while such animal is in the performance of its duties under the supervision of a peace officer, as defined in section 53a-3, or intentionally kills a dog that is a member of a volunteer canine search and rescue team, as defined in section 5-249, while such dog is in the performance of its duties under the supervision of the active individual member of such team, shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than ten years or both.

      (1949 Rev., S. 8571; 1971, P.A. 99; P.A. 84-181; P.A. 89-121; P.A. 90-325, S. 30, 32; P.A. 91-35, S. 3, 5; P.A. 93-36; P.A. 96-243, S. 8, 16; P.A. 04-241, S. 4.)

      History: 1971 act deleted references to "unnecessary" cruelty or neglect to provide proper care and to "cruelly" abandoning animal; P.A. 84-181 increased the maximum fine from two hundred fifty to seven hundred fifty dollars; P.A. 89-121 increased the maximum fine from seven hundred fifty to one thousand dollars; P.A. 90-325 excepted baiting, harassing or worrying any animal in connection with cow-chip bingo from the penalty provisions; P.A. 91-35 deleted exception for baiting, harassing or worrying any animal in connection with cow-chip bingo established by P.A. 90-325; P.A. 93-36 added Subsec. (b) re penalty for intentional killing of a police animal; P.A. 96-243 relettered former Subsec. (b) as Subsec. (d), inserting new Subsec. (b) re malicious and intentional acts re animals and Subsec. (c) re fighting animals exhibited for amusement or gain, effective June 6, 1996; P.A. 04-241 added new Subsec. (d) re penalty for any person who intentionally injures any animal while such animal is performing duties under supervision of a peace officer or intentionally injures a dog in a volunteer canine search and rescue team while such dog is performing duties under supervision of the active individual member of such team, redesignated existing Subsec. (d) as Subsec. (e) and amended same by doubling penalty for intentional killing of a police animal and providing that any person who intentionally kills a dog in a canine search and rescue team while such dog is performing duties under supervision of the active individual member of such team shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than ten years or both.

      See Sec. 29-108a for definition of "animal".

      Cruelty to animals in overworking or neglecting, etc., may be alleged as a continuous offense. 54 C. 2. Information and charge under allegation of neglecting horses. 75 C. 268. It was error for the court to instruct the jury that the defendant owner of animals cruelly treated by a bailee, was chargeable with a strict liability hereunder. 167 C. 434.

      Cited erroneously as Sec. 53a-247. 17 CA 326, 327. Cited. 36 CA 364, 373.

      The fact that defendant, a dog warden, was prosecuted for cruelly beating or unjustifiably injuring a dog, not for killing it, did not preclude him from claiming the benefit of section 22-358. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 62. In determining whether the defendant acted "cruelly", the issue of justification should be carefully considered. Id., 64. It was not enough, for the guidance of the jury, for the court to define "cruelty" in its general sense. What is cruelty in one set of circumstances may not be cruelty in another. Id.