Supreme Court Reserves Order on Plea to Stay Stray Dog Removal Directive

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its order on petitions challenging its August 11 directive to remove all stray dogs from Delhi-NCR streets and confine them permanently in shelters within six to eight weeks. The controversial ruling has triggered strong criticism from animal rights groups, who call the move “unfeasible” and “unscientific.”

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N.V. Anjaria declined to grant an immediate stay but decided to place the matter before a larger Bench for further consideration.

The original order, passed by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, was issued in a suo motu case following reports of increasing dog attacks, including on infants. It directed municipal bodies to begin picking up strays “at the earliest” from all localities, particularly high-risk areas, and to create a dedicated force if necessary.

Key Courtroom Highlights

Kapil Sibal sought a stay, arguing the directive was passed without notice and without compliance with the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023. He accused municipal bodies of inaction and fund mismanagement.

A.M. Singhvi criticised the order as “putting the horse before the cart,” noting shelters were not prepared to accommodate such a large relocation.

Sidharth Luthra pointed out the absence of consultation with NGOs and other stakeholders before passing the order.

Justice Nath rebuked civic authorities for failing to fulfil their duties and demanded accountability.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta defended the order, citing over 37 lakh dog-bite cases annually and warning of underreported rabies deaths, most affecting children.

Animal Rights Opposition

Several organisations condemned the ruling, warning it could cause suffering to dogs on a massive scale and undermine years of humane sterilisation efforts. They have urged the Court to focus on vaccination and birth control instead of mass confinement.

The Court’s final decision is now awaited, with the matter carrying significant public health, legal, and ethical implications.