Stray Dogs – Supreme Court Upholds Rules on Aggressive Dog Control
Stray Dogs – The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to alter its earlier ruling issued on November 7, 2025, regarding the relocation and sterilisation of stray dogs across the country. At the same time, the court allowed authorities to take legally permitted action, including euthanasia, against rabid or highly aggressive dogs when human safety is at risk.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath dismissed all petitions that had challenged the standard operating procedures prepared by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI). The bench stated that it found no valid grounds to interfere with the existing framework.
Court Supports Existing Animal Welfare Framework
In its order, the court said the applications seeking changes to the earlier judgment did not merit acceptance. It also reaffirmed the validity of the AWBI guidelines aimed at controlling stray dog populations through the Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme.
The bench instructed all states and union territories to improve implementation of the existing rules. Authorities have been directed to establish at least one fully operational ABC centre in every district. The court further observed that regions with larger populations should expand these facilities according to local requirements.
The judges emphasised that state governments must ensure the directions are carried out effectively and within a fixed timeline. The ruling also encouraged authorities to examine whether similar measures should be extended to additional public spaces to improve public safety.
Anti-Rabies Measures and Highway Monitoring Ordered
The Supreme Court highlighted the need for adequate supplies of anti-rabies vaccines and medicines in all states. It noted that proper medical preparedness is essential in view of the growing number of dog bite incidents reported from different parts of the country.
The bench also directed the National Highways Authority of India to address the issue of stray cattle and animals on national highways. According to the order, transport vehicles and monitoring systems should be deployed in a time-bound manner to prevent accidents and public risk.
The judgment further clarified that authorities may use lawful measures, including euthanasia in severe cases involving dangerous or infected dogs, to reduce threats to human life.
Officials Given Legal Protection During Enforcement
The court said municipal officers and state officials responsible for carrying out these directions should receive legal protection for actions performed during enforcement of the policy.
It observed that criminal complaints or coercive measures should generally not be initiated against officials acting in accordance with the court’s directions and within the framework of the law.
Rising Dog Bite Cases Raise Concern
The bench expressed serious concern over the increasing number of dog bite incidents reported nationwide. It remarked that delays and ineffective implementation of the ABC framework had worsened the situation over time.
Referring to official reports, the court noted that Rajasthan’s Sri Ganganagar district alone recorded more than 1,000 dog bite cases in a single month. Several incidents reportedly involved children suffering severe injuries, including facial attacks.
The judges also pointed to data from Tamil Nadu, where more than two lakh dog bite cases were reported during the first four months of the year. According to the court, these figures reflect a growing public health challenge that requires urgent administrative attention.
Incidents at Airports and Cities Highlight Management Gaps
The court observed that dog bite cases have increasingly been reported in airports, residential colonies and major urban centres, indicating weaknesses in animal management systems.
It referred to incidents at Indira Gandhi International Airport and other public locations, stating that repeated attacks at some of the country’s busiest facilities raise serious concerns about urban governance and public safety.
The bench also mentioned reports involving foreign travellers, including a German visitor allegedly bitten by a stray dog in Surat. Such incidents, the court noted, can negatively affect public confidence and the country’s image.
States Warned Against Non-Compliance
The Supreme Court warned that failure to follow its directions would invite strict action. It stated that contempt proceedings, disciplinary action and liability claims could be initiated against states that fail to comply with the ruling.
The bench underlined that the constitutional right to live with dignity includes protection from the danger of violent dog attacks. It observed that governments cannot remain passive while children, elderly citizens and travellers continue to face such risks in public spaces.