Feeding points, instructions on dogs with rabies & more: 5 key points from SC verdict on Delhi's stray dogs

The Supreme Court on Friday modified its earlier order of August 11 regarding the management of stray dogs in Delhi and NCR (National Capital Region), directing that the animals will be released back into the same area after sterilisation and immunisation.

5 key takeaways from SC judgment today

1. Stray dogs will be released back to the same area after sterilisation and immunisation, except those infected with rabies or exhibiting aggressive behaviour.
2. No public feeding of dogs will be allowed, and dedicated feeding spaces for stray dogs to be created.
3. Notice boards shall be placed near designated feeding areas mentioning that stray dogs shall only be fed in such areas
4. Animal lovers can move application before MCD for adoption of dogs.
5. The court expanded the ambit of its proceedings on menace of stray dogs and issued notice to Secretaries of department of Animal Husbandry all states and Union Territories and sought their response on framing of national policy to deal with the problem.

Hailing the top court's verdict in this matter, Supreme Court lawyer and petitioner Nanita Sharma called it a "balanced order." She stated that all matters regarding dog issues pending in all courts in all states will be brought under one court.


"This is a balanced order. The court has involved all states in this case. All matters regarding dog issues pending in all courts in all states will be brought under one. They have said that regular dogs should be sterilised and aggressive dogs should be put in pounds/ animal shelters. The court has ruled that MCD will establish designated feeding areas for dogs..." Nanita Sharma told reporters.

On August 11, the top court ordered that all localities in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Gurugram and Faridabad should be made free of stray dogs and there should not be any compromise; it also made it clear that no captured animal will be released back on the streets.

In the detailed order it has clarified that its directive was not driven by "momentary impulse"; rather, it came after thorough and careful deliberation, and the concerned authorities have consistently failed for over two decades to effectively address a serious issue that directly impacts public safety.

A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and R Madadev has said that it has decided to take the matter into its hands because of the systematic failure of the authorities over the past two decades to address an issue that strikes at the heart of public safety.

The bench has said that the directions given by it, as a court which functions for the welfare of the people, are both in the interest of humans as well as dogs, and "this is not personal".