SC directions split activists, but all agree that strays live a dog’s life

New Delhi: Several animal welfare groups and activists expressed mixed reactions to the Supreme Court’s latest directions to deal with stray dogs.

Some welcomed the development as a long-overdue push for scientific implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) framework, while others voiced concern over provisions that could lead to “arbitrary removal or confinement of community dogs”.

Sanjay Mohapatra, founder of House of Stray Animals, described the directions as “historic and progressive” for both public safety and animal welfare. “SC has recognised that the only scientific and sustainable solution to issues relating to community dogs is effective implementation of the ABC Rules, 2023, through sterilisation, anti-rabies vaccination, responsible feeding and proper municipal infrastructure,” he told TOI.

Mohapatra said SC’s step reaffirmed that sterilisation and vaccination, and not indiscriminate culling or cruelty, remain central to the policy to manage stray dogs. “The message from the court is clear — the solution lies in science, compassion, transparency and proper implementation of the law,” he added.

Ambika Shukla, trustee, People For Animals (PFA), also welcomed the court’s emphasis on the accountability of civic agencies and govts. “This strongly reaffirms ABC Rules and places responsibility squarely on authorities that have failed to implement sterilisation and vaccination programmes effectively for years,” she said.

Another animal volunteer said this could finally push authorities to seriously implement long-pending sterilisation and vaccination programmes for stray dogs. “For years, the problem kept compounding because civic bodies failed to carry out proper implementation of the rules on the ground. If the latest development leads to structured sterilisation, vaccination and monitoring, it will help both people and animals in the long run,” the activist said.

However, sections of the animal welfare community raised concerns over certain provisions, particularly those relating to the removal of stray dogs from public spaces and their long-term sheltering.

Delhi-based activist Kunal Gupta criticised the directions as “imbalanced” regarding principles of “social justice” and said they do not adequately address the issue of cruelty faced by community animals. “The court itself observed that sterilisation and vaccination drives have been taking place without planning. Then why are officials responsible for these failures not being held accountable?” he asked.

Gupta alleged that despite substantial monetary allocations for animal welfare schemes, many govt veterinary facilities lack anti-rabies vaccines and adequate infrastructure.

Another animal rights activist was similarly critical, saying this may result in unnecessary confinement of community dogs. “Public safety is important, but the solution can‘t be mass removal of dogs from their territories. Without proper infrastructure, shelters may become overcrowded. Authorities must ensure the court directions are not misused against healthy community animals,” the activist said.

PETA India said that community dogs have been “demonised” for trying to survive in difficult conditions due to decades of human inaction. “The court correctly put the spotlight on the persistent failure at the local govt level to implement the rules over the last 25 years. The answer cannot involve rounding up dogs and forcing them into a life sentence simply for being born, or branding them aggressive and culling them,” it said.