Dinesh Singh Chauhan
A Bench of two Hon’ble Judges of Supreme Court comprising Hon’ble Justice J. B. Pardiwala & Justice R Mahadevan, took suo moto cognizance on 28th July 2025, of a news report published in The Times of India, Delhi Edition, titled “City Hounded by Strays, Kids Pay.
Pursuant to the taking of suo moto cognizance, the matter came to be listed before the Bench on 11th August 2025, on which, the directions were issued to start picking up and rounding the stray dogs from all localities of Delhi, Ghaziabad, NOIDA, Faridabad, Gurugram as well as areas on the outskirts, and relocate these dogs into designated shelters/pounds, create dog shelters/pounds, relocate the stray dogs after their release back onto the streets, while maintaining proper records by the concerned authorities regularly. The stray dogs shall be captured, sterilized, dewormed and immunized as required by Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 and as noted above, shall not be released back. Any hindrance or obstruction that may be caused by any individual or organization in the smooth and effective implementation of our aforesaid directions will be viewed as contempt of Court for taking appropriate action in accordance with law.”
In the intervening period, several interlocutory applications for intervention came to be filed purportedly by individuals and organizations working for the welfare of the stray dogs, seeking a stay on the directions contained in the order dated 11th August, 2025.
The “streeties”, the “Indies”, the ones who are fed leftovers on the street, the ones who “enjoy” a free life, coming and going as they choose, forming alliances and barking through the night, to ward off intruding packs. These dogs bark and chase any passer-by, be they morning joggers or someone returning home late at night. The issue involved in these petitions placed before the Three-Judge Bench which centred around the right of the stray dogs to live on the streets, vis-à-vis, the safety and security of the citizens particularly the kids and elderly people from these very stray dogs, many of whom are suspected to be infected with the communicable disease, i.e., rabies. It is indisputable that human beings bitten by rabid dogs suffer indescribably, and many times, the infection proves to be fatal.
Per contra, Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India, appearing for the GNCTD urged that reports estimate that approximately 37, 15, 713 dog bites occurred in India in 2024, and in several cases, human lives were lost due to trauma and rabies infection. The reports mention that the presence of aggressive stray dogs on streets is causing grave risk to the lives of children and elderly people, as well as other vulnerable sections of society. They are unable to access streets and parks because of the fear of being attacked and bitten by the rabies-infected stray dogs.
The Supreme Court held that it is illegal to feed stray dogs on the streets and in public places. The Supreme Court directed that stray dogs must be fed only in the dedicated feeding spaces to be created in each Municipal Ward by the authorities.
A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta & Justice N. V. Anjaria passed this direction while modifying the August 11, 2025 Order passed by a Two-Judge Bench which directed the relocation of the stray dogs in Delhi-NCR to dog shelters, held that it is illegal to feed stray dogs on the streets and in public places..
Each municipal authority shall create a dedicated helpline number for reporting incidents of violation of the above directions. On such a report being received, appropriate measures shall be taken against the individuals/NGOs concerned.
The Supreme Court reiterated the direction given in Para 13 of the Order dated 11th August 2025, with slight modification that no individual or organization shall cause any hindrance or obstruction in the effective implementation of the directions given above. In case any public servant acting in compliance with the aforesaid directions is obstructed, then the violator/s shall be liable to face prosecution for obstructing the public servant acting in discharge of official duty. The Supreme Court further ordered the prohibition on public feeding.
(The author is Advocate High Court of J&K & Ladakh)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
