Key Takeaways
- Supreme Court orders relocation of stray dogs from schools, hospitals, and transport hubs
- Animal rights activists call the ruling “impractical” and a violation of existing laws
- Experts warn relocation could increase dog bite incidents and aggression
- Focus shifts to improving sterilization infrastructure as sustainable solution
The Supreme Court has directed that stray dogs be removed from educational institutions, hospitals, transport hubs, and sports complexes across India, sparking immediate backlash from animal welfare organizations who argue the order violates national animal protection laws.
Animal rights activists contend the ruling contradicts the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, which mandate that sterilized and vaccinated dogs must be returned to their original territories. They warn that forced relocation could worsen public safety concerns rather than improve them.
Legal Conflict with Animal Protection Laws
“Dogs living on school or railway premises cannot be relocated—it’s their home. The ABC Rules are clear that every dog must be sterilised, vaccinated, and released back. Making exceptions undermines the very basis of animal rights,” said independent activist Sonyaa Khanna.
Former Union minister Maneka Gandhi questioned the practicality of the order: “The Supreme Court is asking every municipal body to remove dogs from schools, hospitals, railway stations and bus stops, and build walls around these spaces. How will they build walls at bus stops or railway stations? How will they stop dogs from returning?”
Relocation Risks and Infrastructure Challenges
Gandhi highlighted that “ninety-five percent of bite cases happen due to relocation” and raised concerns about shelter capacity: “If roughly 35 lakh dogs are taken out of their territories, where will they go? There are no shelters, and even if they are built, who will fund them?”
She advocated for expanding sterilization infrastructure instead: “We need 700 ABC centres for 700 districts. In two years, the population can fall from 1.35 crore to 60 lakh. Right now, only 50 districts have such centres.”
Ground Reality: Implementation Concerns
Delhi Animal Welfare Board member Asher Jesudoss warned that the order could backfire: “We don’t have enough shelters, and there’s no clarity on how new dogs will be kept out of cleared areas. Chasing them away only makes them aggressive.”
Gauri Maulekhi of People for Animals reported that vague court directions were already being misused: “In recent months, we’ve seen dogs being illegally lifted, dumped outside cities, and brutalised. Caregivers, many of them women, have been threatened. Today’s order, without safeguards, will only deepen the crisis.”
Educational Institutions Respond
At Delhi University’s Kirori Mal College, principal Dinesh Khattar expressed practical concerns: “Our students love the campus dogs, so we took the most practical step—vaccinating them to keep everyone safe. The Supreme Court’s proposal feels impractical and impossible to enforce.”
A student added: “If ABC programmes are implemented properly and people are educated, measures like this won’t be needed. This world is as much theirs as ours.”
Municipal Challenges and Funding Shortfalls
The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) indicated it would first discourage feeding inside campuses before removing dogs. An official revealed that ABC shelters were struggling due to funding delays: “They had not received the ₹1,000 per dog payment this year. The proposal is stuck in the standing committee.”
Friday’s order follows earlier directives from August that were subsequently modified to allow dogs to be returned to original locations while restricting feeding to designated zones.
