National
Supreme Court Calls for Better Implementation of Stray Dog Control Measures
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the right to live with dignity also includes the right to live without fear or threat from stray dogs. While dismissing petitions challenging its earlier directions on stray dog relocation and sterilisation, the court directed states and union territories to strengthen infrastructure and ensure effective implementation of animal birth control measures.
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday observed that the right to live with dignity includes the right of citizens to live freely without fear or threat from stray dogs.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria dismissed multiple applications and petitions seeking recall of the court’s earlier directions concerning relocation and sterilisation of stray dogs.
The bench also rejected pleas challenging the validity of the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) for handling stray animal-related issues.
While delivering the order, the court expressed concern over what it described as a “discernible absence” of sustained and systematic efforts by state governments and union territories to control the growing stray dog population.
The bench observed that implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) framework remains inconsistent, underfunded, and uneven across different regions of the country. It said authorities have failed to develop adequate infrastructure and long-term mechanisms required for effective sterilisation, vaccination, and management of stray animals.
The Supreme Court issued a series of directions to states, union territories, municipal authorities, and other statutory bodies to strengthen infrastructure and improve implementation of stray dog management measures.
The court emphasised that public safety and animal welfare must be balanced carefully and stressed the importance of proper execution of animal birth control programmes to address concerns relating to stray dog attacks and population growth.
The ruling comes amid increasing public concern in several parts of the country over incidents involving stray dog attacks, especially involving children and elderly citizens.
Legal experts believe the judgment could push local authorities to adopt more coordinated and better-funded strategies for stray dog control and public safety management across urban and rural areas.
Key Observations by Supreme Court
| Issue | Court Observation |
|---|---|
| Right to Life | Includes living without threat from stray dogs |
| ABC Framework | Implementation remains uneven and underfunded |
| States & UTs | Need stronger infrastructure and sustained action |
| AWBI SOPs | Validity challenge dismissed |
| Focus Areas | Sterilisation, vaccination, public safety |
