No stay on stray dogs’ rounding up; but canines can return to street after sterilisation, immunisation: SC

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to stay the rounding up of stray dogs in Delhi-NCR for sending them to dog shelters with immediate effect even as it clarified that the canines can be released back to the same area after being sterilised and immunised.

Favouring a "holistic approach" to deal with the problem, a three-judge Bench led by Justice Vikram Nath said, “A blanket direction to pick up all the strays and place them in dog shelters/pounds without evaluating the existing infrastructure may lead to a catch-22 situation because such directions may be impossible to comply with.”

Modifying the August 11 order passed by a two-judge Bench led by Justice JB Pardiwala, it said, “The directions…to the extent that they prohibit the release of the picked up strays shall be kept in abeyance for the time being. The dogs that are picked up shall be sterilised, dewormed, vaccinated, and released back to the same area from which they were picked up.”

The Bench, however, “clarified that this relocation shall not apply to the dogs infected with rabies or suspected to be infected with rabies, and those that display aggressive behaviour. “Such dogs shall be sterilised and immunised, but under no circumstances should they be released back onto the streets. Furthermore, as far as possible, such stray dogs shall be kept in a separate pound/shelter after sterilisation and immunisation, it said.

“Municipal authorities shall forthwith commence an exercise for creating dedicated feeding spaces for the stray dogs in each municipal ward. The feeding areas shall be created/identified keeping in view the population and concentration of stray dogs in the particular municipal ward,” said the Bench -- which also included Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjaria.

The top court prohibited the feeding of stray dogs on streets. “Under no condition shall the feeding of stray dogs on the streets be permitted. The persons found feeding the dogs on the streets in contravention of the above directions shall be liable to be proceeded against under the relevant legal framework,” it ordered.

The Bench said these directions were being issued in view of reports of untoward incidents caused by unregulated feeding of stray dogs and to ensure that the practice of feeding dogs on roads and in public places was eliminated, as such practice created “great difficulties for the common man walking on the streets”.

Expanding the scope of the PIL, the Bench transferred to itself all stray dog-related cases pending in various high courts and issued notices to all states/UTs through their Animal Husbandry Secretaries. "All similar matters shall be transferred to this court for a final national policy," it said.

Asking them to furnish information regarding steps being taken for compliance of the Animal Birth Control Rules in their respective jurisdictions, the Bench posted the matter for further hearing after eight weeks.

It also asked "dog lovers" and NGOs, which have moved the top court seeking stay/recall of the August 11 order for permanent relocation of strays, to deposit Rs 25,000 and Rs 2 lakh, respectively, within a week for being heard in the matter. “The amounts so deposited shall be utilised in the creation of the infrastructure and facilities for the stray dogs under the aegis of the respective municipal bodies,” it said.

“The desirous animal lover/s shall be free to move the application to the concerned municipal body for adoption of the street dogs, upon which the identified/selected street dog/s shall be tagged and given in adoption to the applicant. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant(s) to ensure that the adopted stray dogs do not return to the streets,” the Bench said.

The top court said that “no individual or organisation shall cause any hindrance or obstruction in the effective implementation of the directions given above. In case any public servant acting in compliance with the aforesaid directions is obstructed, then the violator/s shall be liable to face prosecution for obstructing the public servant acting in discharge of official duty”.

The top court directed each municipal authority to create a dedicated helpline number for reporting incidents of violation of the above directions. “On such a report being received, appropriate measures shall be taken against the individuals/NGOs concerned,” it added.

“The aggressive sterilisation would definitely put a curb on the rapid growth of the stray dog population, ultimately leading to its reduction,” it said, adding “this is possible only in an idealistic situation, which seems unlikely in the present scenario”.

The matter was assigned to the three-judge Bench on August 13 by CJI BR Gavai after some petitioners mentioned before the CJI that the August 11 directions were in conflict with previous orders passed by other Benches and statutory provisions.

While reserving its order on August 14, the Bench had said, “The whole problem is because of the inaction of local authorities... Rules are framed, but no implementation carried out, creating a problem today. On the one hand, humans are suffering; on the other hand, animal lovers want dogs protected.”

On August 11, a Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan had issued directions in a suo motu case titled ‘CITY HOUNDED BY STRAYS, KIDS PAY PRICE’ to permanently relocate all canines from streets to shelters "at the earliest".

"This is the time to act. All these animal activists and all these so-called animal lovers…will they bring back all those children who have fallen prey to rabies? Will they put life back in those children? Let's take a practical view of the matter. When the situation demands, you have to act,” it had said.