'Shift them to shelters': Supreme Court orders removal of stray dogs from public premises

A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N.V. Anjaria observed that allowing sterilised stray dogs to return to such public spaces would “defeat the very purpose” of securing these zones and safeguarding public health.

The Bench further ordered that all stray dogs presently inhabiting these premises be captured, sterilised, and vaccinated in accordance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, framed under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

“They shall not be released back in the same area, since doing so would frustrate the very intent of this directive,” Justice Mehta stated while delivering the operative part of the order.

The directions were issued in the court’s suo motu proceedings concerning the creation of a national framework for stray dog management and ensuring adherence to existing animal welfare regulations.

Additionally, the Bench instructed all State governments to ensure—within eight weeks—that both government and private institutions, including schools, colleges, hospitals, transport hubs, and sports facilities, are properly fenced to prevent the entry of stray animals.

Each establishment must also appoint a nodal officer responsible for surveillance and maintenance.

Local bodies and panchayats have been directed to carry out regular inspections over the next three months and submit compliance reports to the court.

Stray cattle on highways

The Bench also ordered the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to remove stray cattle and other animals from national and state highways and relocate them to designated shelters.

The court noted that the suggestions made by senior advocate Gaurav Agrawal, who is assisting the Bench as amicus curiae, would be incorporated in a detailed written order to be released later.

Earlier directions and administrative reassignment

The latest order follows the court’s earlier observation on November 3, where it took serious note of government employees feeding stray dogs within office premises, calling the practice a violation of its previous directions that required local bodies to create designated feeding zones for canines.

In an August 22 directive, the same Bench had ordered municipal authorities across the country to establish feeding zones in every ward, ensuring that stray dogs are fed in a regulated manner that does not cause inconvenience to the public.

That order was prompted by several “untoward incidents” arising from unregulated feeding, which the court said had caused “great hardship to the common man walking on the streets.”

The court had also expressed strong displeasure over the failure of most States and Union Territories to file compliance reports on the implementation of the ABC Rules, despite being granted three months to do so.

It directed the Chief Secretaries of the defaulting States to personally appear before the court on November 3, exempting only Telangana and West Bengal, which had complied.

The Chief Secretary of Delhi was specifically ordered to appear in person despite the submission of a report by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD).

Origin of the suo motu proceedings

The case originated amid mounting public concern over rising dog-bite incidents, including the tragic death of a six-year-old girl, which prompted an earlier order from a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan calling for the mass capture of stray dogs across Delhi and neighbouring districts, without their release.

That directive, however, faced severe backlash from animal welfare organisations, which warned that the move would amount to cruelty and violate statutory provisions.

Responding to the criticism, Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai took the rare administrative step of withdrawing the matter from Justice Pardiwala’s Bench and reassigning it to a three-judge Bench led by Justice Vikram Nath.

Describing the earlier order as “too harsh,” the Justice Nath-led Bench had, on August 22, ruled that stray dogs must be sterilised, vaccinated, and released back into their localities, except where the animals were rabid or dangerously aggressive.

The Bench gave States eight weeks to submit progress reports on the enforcement of the ABC Rules, which require local authorities to conduct catch–neuter–vaccinate–release (CNVR) programmes alongside anti-rabies drives.