Two pet dogs who had attacked a lawyer in DHA were put to sleep on Monday after an agreement was reached between the pets’ owner and the victim. The matter, however, proved to be hotly debated on social media with many people angry that the dogs had to be euthanized.

However, there was some who felt justice had been served as the lawyer, Mirza Akhtar, was badly injured last month when the two dogs, owned by Humayun Ali Khan, attacked him and their handlers could not stop them. The video of the dogs attacking him went viral.

The matter went to court and an out of court agreement was reached by the two parties, one of the conditions of which was to put the dogs down.

Many uttered distresses over the cruelty of the actions and noted that only "the owner should have been made liable."

Another user blamed the owner for his misstep around the issue, stating that he could have refused to sign the agreement and be prosecuted himself.

One person attached the written copy of the agreement reached between the two parties, replying that the owner had been ignorant in handling and training the dogs.

User KhizM in a series of tweets expressed how the actions taken were not out of justice but revenge, further mentioning how the dogs could have been rehabilitated under proper care.

Some noted the power dynamics at play within the agreement, one user remarking that this wouldn't have happened had the victim been a "rickshaw owner."

Another noted how the incident happened between “two men of privilege”, one mishandling his pet and the other riled by the actions of the owner.

Actor Adnan Siddiqui put forward a statement on Instagram regarding the matter, stating that "the authorities were quick to administer "justice" in this case" and wishes the authorities were as prompt in handling cases of rape and child abuse.

It must be mentioned here that the actor is related to the dogs’ owner.

Someone reacted harshly to the actor’s post, saying his statement was disingenuous and adding dangerous dogs to roam freely in the city would exacerbate the problem of criminals who roam free.

Actress Mashal Khan also took to Instagram expressing her anger at the decision. In her Instagram story she stated how "In a country where rapists, murderers and pedophiles roam free, two dogs are given the death sentence for their owner’s negligence."

While some remain concerned and anguished over the incident, others note that these types of dogs threaten human life and it is fair enough to put them down according to international precedent.

A user raised a comparison between street children and street dogs, stating that they should both be kept indoors.

Another mentioned that all developed countries put down pets who attack and that the decision made was a right one.

The agreement causes controversy

A compromise was made between the dog owner Khan and the victim, Mirza, wherein the latter agreed to forgive the dog owner if he donated Rs.1 million to Ayesha Chundrigar Foundation (ACF) and put down the dogs.

In the next few days ACF was subject to a variety of attacks on social media, with people attacking them for receiving a donation and not condemning the euthanizing of the two dogs.

ACF is a well-known not-for profit organization and animal shelter, caring for a variety of animals from injured, to strays, to those left behind by their owners and even those targeted by the government.

The foundation shared the letter written by Mirza which stated that ACF had not known about the details for which the donation was received.

In the same post, a statement was put out by the organization, who wrote that they had not been responsible for the decision made by the owner and the victim and that “they could not retrain the dogs” even putting details of people willing to retrain the dogs. The organization which is mostly run on donations and funds, also mentioned that “they are being attacked for their limitations” and made to drop the donation when it could have been used to “neuter and vaccinate numerous dogs and maybe save their lives”

Previously the foundation had posted that there had been intense bullying, threats and accusations thrown at the organization, suspicion and rumors spread on social media regarding the situation. In the Instagram description, they expressed shock at people’s treatment of the members of the organization when they were not even a part of the incident, and how people were spinning “stories on social media” that could “hurt and tarnish the reputation of the first animal rescue service.”

People took to Twitter emphasizing the importance of the organization and the hypocritical positions some people took regarding the entire incident.

User HalaBMalik mentioned that the attack towards organizations such as ACF was unnecessary and how was suddenly everyone an expert on how to handle funds for stray animals.

Another mentioned the unfortunate "leg pulling in the animal welfare community" further stating how people and NGOs working in this space were involved in this process.

Another expressed the senselessness of the blame put on ACF, remarking how anger at the decision to euthanize could be justified but not "at the expense of tarnishing ACF's reputation. "