Premium

‘Right of every citizen to move freely’: Supreme Court dismisses plea against stray dogs SOP

The court noted that it cannot remain oblivious to the harsh and deeply disturbing ground realities emerging from various parts of the country concerning the stray dogs menace.

Supreme CourtSupreme Court passed the order in a suo matter involving the issue of stray dogs.

Underscoring the right to live with dignity under Article 21 includes the right to move freely in public spaces without the fear of dog bites, the Supreme Court, on Tuesday, dismissed the pleas challenging the standard operating procedure (SOP) to manage the stray dog menace, including that canines picked up from a public area should not be returned to the same place after sterilisation/ immunisation.

A bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath and comprising Justices Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria said, “This court finds no reason whatsoever to interfere with the SOP dated November 27, 2025, issued by the AWBI in compliance with the directions of this court. The challenge made to the SOPs, both on the grounds of the alleged excess of jurisdiction as well as on the basis of the inconsistency with the statutory scheme, does not merit acceptance in light of the conclusions recorded herein above. Accordingly, all interlocutory applications challenging the validity of the said SOPs stand dismissed.”

Alokparna Sengupta, managing director of Humane World for Animals India, welcomed the top court’s directions and urged all state governments and municipal bodies to address the root cause of the conflict through systematic and scientific sterilisation and vaccination drives.

“We are encouraged by the Court’s directions towards urgent and effective implementation of the statutory mandate of ABC. We urge all State governments and municipal bodies to undertake the responsibility to address the root cause of the conflict- systematic and scientific sterilization and vaccination programs”, Sengupta said.

She further expressed hope that states and Union Territories would not resort to measures beyond the scope of established law and scientific process, warning that such steps could lead to overpopulation and further conflict.

The applications had challenged the November 27, 2025, SOP issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) for stray dog management.

The top court had then directed all states and Union Territories to remove stray dogs from the premises of educational institutions, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands and depots, and railway stations, “to a designated shelter, after due sterilisation and vaccination in accordance with the Animal Birth Control Rules”.

Story continues below this ad

“The right to live with dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India necessarily encompasses the right of every citizen to move freely and access public spaces without living under a constant apprehension of physical harm, attack, or exposure to life-threatening events such as dog bites in public areas”, the verdict highlighted.

The court added that it cannot remain oblivious to the harsh and deeply disturbing ground realities emerging from various parts of the country where young children have been mauled, elderly persons have been attacked, ordinary citizens have been left vulnerable in public spaces, and even international travellers have fallen victim to such incidents.

Problem escalated: Supreme Court

The bench observed had the states and the Union Territories acted with due diligence and foresight in implementing the mandate of the ABC framework from its inception, which including the timely and phased augmentation of sterilisation capacity, sustained vaccination drives, and the development of adequate institutional infrastructure, the present situation would not have assumed such alarming proportions.

The framework envisaged under the ABC Rules 2023 was intended to operate as a preventive and a long-term mechanism which required continuous and coordinated effort over time, it added.

Story continues below this ad

“Failure to adopt such a proactive, structured, and sustained approach has therefore resulted in a largely reactive and crisis-driven response necessitated by the escalation of the problem rather than its prevention. Such an approach is neither efficient nor capable of yielding durable solutions, particularly in matters involving public health, human safety, and ecological balance,” the order said.

The bench was “constrained to observe” that the prolonged inaction, coupled with the absence of institutional commitment to the effective implementation of the ABC framework, has contributed significantly to the persistence as well as the aggravation of the problem, which has now assumed dimensions warranting urgent and systemic intervention.

“After reserving judgment in the present matter, this court has been apprised of multiple reports indicating that the incidents of dog bites and stray dog attacks continue to occur across different parts of the country with alarming frequency and severity. The reports brought to the notice of this court reveal that the magnitude of the problem and the resultant threat posed to the public safety has assumed deeply disturbing proportions,” the Supreme Court said.

Supreme Court: States, UTs grappling with dog bites

  • A newspaper report from Rajasthan brought to the notice of the court highlights that in the city of Sri Ganganagar alone, as many as 1,840 dog bite incidents were reported within a span of nearly three months.
  • While in Sikar, several incidents involving attacks on children by stray dogs have been reported during the same period. In Udaipur, approximately 1,750 cases of dog bites have been reported, recorded in 2026 till the date of publication of the report, whereas Jhalwara witnessed 42 persons being bitten by stray dogs in a single day.
  • The report further refers to deeply disturbing incidents in which young children suffered grievous injuries, including mauling of the faces and limbs by the stray dogs. The situation prevailing in other states is even more alarming.
  • It has been brought to the notice of this court that the state of Tamil Nadu alone recorded approximately 2.63 lakh dog bite cases within the first four months of 2026, along with 17 reported deaths attributable to such incidents.
  • It has been reported that nearly 62,000 dog bite cases were recorded in each in January and February, 71,000 cases in March, and approximately 68,000 cases in April 2026, thereby constituting a substantial proportion of the total 6.25 lakh dog bite cases and thirty-four deaths recorded during the entirety of the previous year.
  • This court has also been apprised of further reports published in leading national newspapers, which demonstrate that the menace of dog attacks has extended to public spaces of critical importance, including airports, residential areas, and urban centres across multiple states.
  • A report concerning the IGI, New Delhi, states that the airport authorities themselves acknowledged that at least thirty-one dog bite incidents had been reported across airport terminals since January 2026.

The report further reports allegations of aggressive stray dogs within the airport premises and consequent attempts by the authorities to remove or relocate such animals after the incidents involving the passengers being bitten on the 13th and 31st March 2026.

Story continues below this ad

“The very occurrence of repeated dog bite incidents within one of the country’s busiest international airports demonstrates the grave inadequacy of the existing containment and public safety measures. Another report relating to the state of Karnataka reports that more than two lakh dog bite cases were reported within merely the first four months of 2026, accompanied by at least 25 rabies-related deaths during the same period.”

Directions

The court asked states and UT’s to “forthwith take decisive and coordinated time-bound steps for announcing and augmenting the infrastructure necessary for the effective implementation of the ABC frame, including the expansion of sterilisation and vaccination capacity, strengthening of existing facilities, and creation of additional institutional mechanisms, commensurate with the skill and urgency of the issue.”

It said that the states and UT’s should ensure the establishment of at least one fully functional ABC centre in each district, duly equipped with adequate veterinary infrastructure, trained personnel, surgical facilities, and supporting logistics so as to enable the systemic continuous and large-scale implementation of sterilisation and vaccination programs.

The court said that such centres shall function with adequate capacity to address the local population of state dogs with proper record keeping, monitoring, and periodic reporting to ensure effective and sustained implementation of the ABC framework.

Story continues below this ad

It said the states and the UTs shall ensure adequate availability of anti-rabies vaccine, and immunoglobin in all government, medical facilities, and shall put in place effective public health response mechanisms to deal with cases of dog bites.

Suo motu case

On August 11, a two-judge bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan had ordered authorities in Delhi-NCR to relocate all stray dogs from the streets to dedicated shelters, underlining that the canines should not be returned to the streets. The order led to an uproar among animal lovers who rushed to the SC. The matter was later referred to a three-judge bench.

Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience. Expertise Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents. Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes: Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts. Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity. Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes: Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law. Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates. Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More

Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

 

Advertisement
Loading Recommendations...
Advertisement
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments