Animal welfare groups hail apex court’s fresh verdict on stray dogs

For over a decade, Vinita Kumar has been feeding and caring for nearly 30 community dogs in her East End Apartments in Mayur Vihar Area, Delhi. Along with her husband, she has spent time and money vaccinating and sterilising most of them. But on Friday, after the Supreme Court modified its earlier order on the management of stray dogs in Delhi-NCR, Kumar was left with more questions than answers.

“The judgment is so-so. Who will decide which dog is ferocious? Who will decide where they go? A vet should be there to assess. And what about gated complexes like ours? The order is only clear for public spaces and streets, but inside societies, it is still vague,” Kumar said.

The court’s ruling comes after months of litigation over rising dog-bite cases and conflicts between residents, RWAs and dog feeders. In its fresh directions, the Bench clarified that stray dogs will not be removed en masse. Only those found rabid or “highly ferocious” can be caught. The rest are to be vaccinated, sterilised and released back where they were picked up. The court also barred random roadside feeding, directing the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and other local authorities to earmark designated feeding points for community dogs. To support this framework, NGOs approaching the court must contribute Rs 2 lakh and individual petitioners Rs 25,000 towards a welfare fund.

For feeders like Kumar, however, the order raises practical concerns. “If every society pushes dogs out, where will they go? Streets are already crowded,” she asked. “And how will the MCD know where feeding happens unless they coordinate with us? Feeders should be in touch with officials to decide spots,” said Kumar.

Animal welfare voices cautiously welcomed the decision. Deeksha, another resident of East End Apartments and a pet parent herself, called it “a very positive order.”

She said the ruling could finally push civic bodies to enforce the Animal Birth Control (ABC) rules properly. “The best part is that now the government will think about a national policy with input from doctors, vets and even dog psychologists. Removing stray dogs is not a solution — sterilisation, vaccination and adoption are.”

Deeksha also pointed to the importance of encouraging adoption of Indian breeds. “People spend money on exotic breeds unsuited for our climate, while our own desi dogs are hardy and brilliant. Adoption of Indie dogs should be promoted,” she said.

RWAs, on the other hand, see both clarity and loopholes in the ruling. Atul Goyal, an RWA representative, said while sterilisation and designated feeding points are “a step forward,” implementation will be the real test.

“Unless the veterinary departments of the urban local bodies are made accountable at the ward level, nothing will change,” he said. “Feeding has to be managed at the colony level, within 200-500 metres, not just at ward level. Otherwise, it will fail,” he said.

Goyal also flagged unaddressed issues such as the practice of meat shops and eateries dumping waste that attracts strays. “There is no order on controlling that. Unless restaurants and meat vendors are restricted from feeding dogs with waste food, the problem will persist,” he noted.

Ajay, another RWA leader, emphasised that while the idea of designated feeding points looks promising, its success will depend entirely on coordination. “Dogs will start staying near feeding centres,” he said. “So, the implementation of this order will need extensive collaboration between the MCD and the local communities, including dog lovers and feeders. Without that, this will remain only on paper,” Ajay said.

Rajiv Verma, former secretary of the Mayur Vihar Pocket 4 RWA, said: “The problem with dogs is not just about disease. Even if they are not rabid, people are afraid of them. Vaccination doesn’t remove the fear.” Verma suggested that the authorities mark vaccinated dogs visibly with collars or tags so that residents feel reassured about safety.