Chief Justice of India (CJI) B. R. Gavai has assured that he will “look into” a plea challenging the Supreme Court’s recent directive to relocate all stray dogs from Delhi-NCR streets into shelters – an order that has ignited fierce debate and divided public opinion.
Conflicting Bench Orders Fuel Judicial Review
On August 11, a bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan issued a sweeping order for municipal bodies to round up all stray dogs, particularly from vulnerable areas, and transfer them to dedicated shelters within six to eight weeks. The judgment emphasized public safety amid rising cases of dog bites and rabies, especially affecting children and the elderly. Authorities were directed to ensure sterilization, vaccination, CCTV monitoring, and set up a helpline for bite reports, warning of legal consequences against any obstruction.
However, when a plea from the Conference for Human Rights (India) was brought before CJI Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, the lawyer highlighted conflicting orders – citing an earlier 2024 bench directive under Justice J.K. Maheshwari that emphasized the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2001. These rules mandate sterilization, vaccination, and returning community dogs to their original localities, while prohibiting indiscriminate removal or killing.
According to Mint, in response, CJI Gavai acknowledged the discord, stating, “But the other judge bench has already passed orders. I will look into this.” This signals the possibility of a formal judicial reconsideration or referral to a larger bench to resolve the doctrinal conflict.
Public Reaction: Safety Versus Compassion
The August 11 order has generated a sharp divide in public sentiment. Supporters of the directive, including several Resident Welfare Associations and families affected by stray dog incidents, have welcomed the judgment as a necessary intervention to safeguard public health. They argue that unchecked dog populations and rising bite cases have created a public safety emergency in the capital region.
On the other hand, animal rights advocates and NGOs have expressed alarm, labeling the directive as “impractical and inhumane.” Many argue that the lack of infrastructure, shelter capacity, and humane planning makes such mass relocation unfeasible. They point to the absence of a clear roadmap, adequate funding, and proper facilities to handle thousands of animals without violating their welfare rights.
The Economic Times editorial criticized the ruling as arbitrary and unconstitutional, noting it undermines the ABC framework and dismisses scientific consensus in favor of a dog-bite narrative built on questionable data.
Celebrity voices have also joined the debate. Actor John Abraham called the relocation order “impractical and inhumane” and urged the CJI to reconsider, emphasizing that stray dogs are an intrinsic part of the city’s ecosystem. Similarly, Rahul Gandhi voiced concern over animal welfare and the logistical issues in implementing the directive.
Meanwhile, street protests have erupted in Delhi. Around 35–40 activists and dog lovers gathered near Connaught Place, with some detained for defying public order. Protesters demanded humane and sustainable solutions, decrying the court’s stance as contradictory to animal welfare principles.
Why It Matters & What’s Next
Delhi alone faces a stray dog population estimated between 500,000 to 1 million, alongside a staggering number of dog-bite incidents — up to 2,000 per day — and rising rabies cases. The court’s impassioned push for removal and sheltering underscores the urgency, yet its abrupt deviation from established policy has raised alarms about due process and animal welfare.
With CJI Gavai’s commitment to review, the matter may be referred to a larger bench, paving the way for a balanced, legally consistent, and humane resolution that addresses both public safety and the rights of animals.
For more stories click here
Follow us for latest updates:
