• Source:JND

In a major development in the stray dogs case hearing, the Supreme Court on Thursday said that it had only directed the removal of dogs from institutional areas. Clarifying on the scope of its earlier order, the bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria emphasised that it had not ordered the removal of every stray dog from the streets.

Dogs And Cats Are Natural Enemies 

ALSO READ: Delhi Government To File FIR Against Arvind Kejriwal Over ‘Teachers Counting Dogs’ Allegation

Responding to the submissions, the Supreme Court observed that dogs and cats are “natural enemies” and remarked that promoting cats could help control rodent populations. At the same time, the bench underlined that its focus remained on strict compliance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules and reiterated that the directions were limited to sensitive institutional spaces. The judges raised concerns over public safety, particularly in hospitals, asking how many dogs should be allowed to roam hospital corridors and around patients, indicating that health and safety considerations were paramount.

Removal Of Dogs Can Increase Rats And Monkeys 

The court was hearing further arguments in the matter, during which senior advocate CU Singh submitted that the issue extended beyond dogs to all stray animals and required a balanced, scientific approach. He cautioned that sudden removal of dogs from an area often produces a “vacuum effect”, leading to a sharp increase in rats and monkeys. Rodents, he said, carry several diseases and are kept in check by the presence of dogs, and abrupt interventions could disturb this fragile balance.

Reacting to Singh’s submissions, the bench remarked in a lighter vein that cats kill rodents and promoting more cats and fewer dogs could be a solution, while reiterating that the court had never ordered blanket removal of stray dogs.

ABC Rules And Locknow Model 

Senior advocate Vinay Navare told the court that the ABC Rules themselves were not under challenge, but their implementation remained weak. He cited the “Lucknow model” as a successful example and urged that similar systems be adopted nationwide, with greater involvement of municipal bodies and panchayats and improved infrastructure, which high courts could later monitor.

ALSO READ: 'Cannot Read Dog’s Mind To Know When It Will Bite': Supreme Court In Stray Dogs Case

Meanwhile, counsel for petitioner Vijay Goyal argued that the matter was not about being “dog lovers” but about residents’ right to safely use their homes and streets. He explained that dogs are highly territorial and when feeding points are placed far from their usual zones, conflicts increase, heightening the risk of dog bites for residents.

 


Also In News