Can’t read dog’s mind when it wants to bite: SC

Highlighting the increasing number of dog bite incidents across India, the Supreme Court on Wednesday pulled up municipal authorities for their failure to implement Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules.

“No one knows which dog is in what mood in the morning… you don’t know... We are conscious that these things are happening. Children, adults are getting bit, people are dying not only due to dog bites alone, but also because of accidents caused by stray animals on roads,” a Special Bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjaria said.

It pointed out that in the last 20 days, there were two animal-related road accidents involving two Rajasthan High Court judges and one judge was in serious condition after sustaining spinal injuries.

“It’s a serious issue,” the Bench said while hearing pleas filed by dog lovers and those seeking stringent compliance of orders seeking modification of its earlier orders.

Highlighting the unpredictability of dogs’ behaviour, Justice Nath said, “The roads should be clear of stray animals. It is not only dog bites, but also the roaming of stray animals on roads that is proving dangerous and causing accidents. Civic bodies have to implement the rules, modules and directions strictly.”

“Should people suffer because of the authorities’ failure to comply with the ABC Rules?” asked the Bench which would resume the hearing on Thursday.

The top court had taken suo motu cognisance of the menace on July 28 last year following media reports of stray dogs mauling children and the elderly in the national capital.

On Wednesday, while examining the issue of stray dogs’ presence on institutional premises, the Bench wondered if courts, schools and hospitals should have canine presence at all.

Many lawyers and animal rights activists said they were not heard before passing of the order on November 7 last year.

Taking note of an “alarming rise” in dog bite incidents within institutional areas such as educational institutions, hospitals and railway stations, the Supreme Court had on November 7, 2025, directed immediate shifting of stray canines to designated shelters after due sterilisation and vaccination.

The top court had made it clear that the stray dogs picked up shall not be released back to the same location from which they were removed.

“We have consciously directed the non-release of such stray dogs to the same location from which they were picked up, as permitting the same would frustrate the very effect of the directions issued to liberate such institutional areas from the presence of stray dogs,” it had said, directing the authorities to complete the exercise as soon as possible and preferably in eight weeks.

On behalf of the petitioner seeking modification of the November 7 order, senior advocate Kapil Sibal submitted that the solution was not to capture all dogs, but to adopt a scientific formula, accepted worldwide for reducing animal-human conflict. The court can adopt the formula of CSVR (capture, sterilise, vaccinate and release) for managing and controlling the population of stray dogs which would gradually reduce the dog bite incidents, he said.

“First of all, this is not an adversarial issue and we are here as dog lovers. If one tiger is a man-eater, we don’t kill all tigers…We must make sure that sterilisation takes place and the population (of dogs) must come down. There is a process for that,” Sibal said, adding the response against the stray dog issue should be reflective of a mature and responsible society.

“Prevention is always better than cure,” Justice Nath said, pointing out that there was nothing much to argue in the matter as the court had only directed removal of stray dogs from institutional areas and had not interfered with any rules and regulations.

The Bench said it wanted strict enforcement of rules, regulations, modules and standard operating procedures (SOPs) by states and civic bodies.

As amicus curiae Gaurav Agarwal submitted that states of Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Punjab had not filed compliance affidavits and some other states filed very “disappointing” affidavits, Justice Nath said the Bench would deal with them.

Agarwal said the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) has prepared an SOP to implement the court order. “They have identified 1,400 km of road as a vulnerable stretch. However, after detection, the NHAI says the state governments have to take care of it,” he said.

The Bench suggested fencing of roads and expressways to prevent stray animals from coming onto the roads.

“The only thing missing is providing counselling to the dogs as well so that he doesn’t bite when released back,” the Bench remarked in a lighter vein.

Senior advocates Colin Gonsalves, Anand Grover, CU Singh and some animal rights activists appearing in-person also made submissions.

On behalf of NALSAR, Hyderabad, senior advocate KK Venugopal highlighted the data on inadequate number of shelters needed for housing the stray dogs.