[ad_1]
Supreme Court of India
In Re: “City Hounded By Strays, Kids Pay … vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 22 August, 2025
Author: Vikram Nath
Bench: Vikram Nath
2025 INSC 1018
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INHERENT/CIVIL ORIGINAL/
EXTRAORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SUO MOTO WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) NO(S). 5 OF 2025
IN RE: “CITY HOUNDED BY STRAYS, KIDS PAY
PRICE”
WITH
WRIT PETITION(CIVIL) NO(S). 784 OF 2025
SLP(CIVIL) NO(S). 14763 OF 2024
AND
SLP(CIVIL) NO(S). 17623 OF 2025
ORDER
BY THE COURT
1. A Bench of two Hon’ble Judges of this Court
took suo moto cognizance on 28th July 2025, of a
news report published in The Times of India, Delhi
Edition, titled “City Hounded by Strays, Kids Pay
Price”.1
1 Koushiki Saha, “Delhi hounded by strays, kids pay price: Girl (6) dies of
rabies after dog attack, family alleges official apathy”, (Time of India, 28
Signature Not Verified July, 2025) can be accessed here <
Digitally signed by
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/delhi-hounded-by-
NEETU KHAJURIA
Date: 2025.08.22
13:19:31 IST
strays-kids-pay-price-girl-6-dies-of-rabies-after-dog-attack-family-alleges-
Reason:
official-apathy/articleshow/122938488.cms>
1
2. Pursuant to the taking of suo moto cognizance,
the matter came to be listed before the Bench on 11th
August 2025, on which, the following directions were
issued: –
“12. For the present, the aforesaid directions shall be
complied with and implemented scrupulously. We, at
the cost of repetition, again make it abundantly clear to
the above concerned authorities in clear words that it
shall at the earliest: –
(i) Start picking up and rounding the stray dogs from
all localities of Delhi, Ghaziabad, NOIDA, Faridabad,
Gurugram as well as areas on the outskirts, and
relocate these dogs into designated
shelters/pounds.
(ii) The appropriate authorities of NCT of Delhi,
NOIDA, Ghaziabad, Gurugram & Faridabad are
directed to immediately create dog shelters/pounds
and report to this Court the creation of such
infrastructure all over the National Capital Region
(NCR). A report in this regard shall be filed before this
Court within a period of eight-weeks.
(iii) In no circumstances, should these stray dogs
after their relocation be once again released back
onto the streets. In this regard proper records should
be maintained by the concerned authorities regularly.
(iv) The stray dogs shall be captured, sterilized,
dewormed and immunized as required by Animal
Birth Control Rules, 2023 and as noted above, shall
not be released back. The dog shelters/pounds should
have sufficient personnel to sterilize, deworm and
immunize stray dogs and also for looking after the stray
dogs who would be detained.
(v) We further make it clear that both the exercise of
rounding up of stray dogs as well as the creation of
necessary infrastructure in the form of
shelters/pounds for the relocation, sterilization,2
deworming and immunization, shall be undertaken
simultaneously. We do not want to hear about even a
semblance of lethargy from the concerned authorities
on the pre-text of awaiting the creation of
shelters/pounds, otherwise, we will proceed to take
strict action against these authorities. All authorities
are directed to immediately begin the picking up
stray dogs and in the same breadth creation of
appropriate and adequate shelter homes and pounds
across the National Capital Region.
13. Any hindrance or obstruction that may be
caused by any individual or organization in the
smooth and effective implementation of our
aforesaid directions will be viewed as contempt of
this Court and we shall proceed to take appropriate
action in accordance with law.”
(Emphasis supplied)
3. It may be noted that, in the intervening period,
several interlocutory applications for intervention
came to be filed purportedly by individuals and
organisations working for the welfare of the stray
dogs2, seeking a stay on the directions contained in
the order dated 11th August, 2025.
4. The issue involved in these petitions placed
before the three-Judge Bench centres around the
right of the stray dogs to live on the streets, vis-à-vis,
the safety and security of the citizens particularly the
kids and elderly people from these very stray dogs,
many of whom are suspected to be infected with the
2 Hereinafter, referred to as ‘animal lovers’.
3
communicable disease, i.e., rabies. It is indisputable
that human beings bitten by rabid dogs suffer
indescribably, and many times, the infection proves
to be fatal.
5. For better understanding, a brief description of
the issues raised in the other petitions apart from the
Suo Moto Writ Petition listed before us is necessary.
6. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14763 of 20243
lays a challenge to the order dated 18th August, 2023
passed by the High Court of Delhi, wherein the
Division Bench expressed its satisfaction over the
task of sterilisation and immunisation of street dogs
being undertaken by the Government of National
Capital Territory of Delhi (‘GNCTD’) and Municipal
Corporation of Delhi (‘MCD’). Being dissatisfied with
the aforesaid order, the Conference for Human Rights
(India) (Regd.), a non-governmental organisation, has
filed the aforesaid special leave petition.
7. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17623 of 20254
arises from the judgment dated 3rd March, 2025
3 Titled as ‘Conference for Human Rights (India) (Regd.) v. Union of India and
Ors.’
4 Titled as ‘Reema Shah v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.’
4
passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad, which was dealing with the
Writ Petition5 filed by a resident of NOIDA, District
Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, who was
aggrieved by the harassment faced during the feeding
of the community dogs. The Division Bench observed
that the concerns raised in the petition were
regulated by the Animal Birth Control Rules, 20236,
which provide for capturing, sterilisation, and
immunisation of street dogs as well as the measures
to be taken for the feeding of the community dogs.
The Division Bench closed the writ petition, with a
direction to the concerned authorities to ensure that
necessary steps are taken in public interest to
subserve the cause raised therein, and while doing
so, the interest of the common man in moving on the
streets must also be factored in.
8. While the aforesaid special leave petitions were
pending before this Court, the mandatory directions
in the terms indicated above came to be passed in the
Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No. 5 of 2025.
5 WRIT-C No. 6572 of 2023.
6 Hereinafter, referred to as “ABC Rules.”
5
9. Various Non-governmental Organizations
(NGOs) and individuals, stating to be animal lovers,
claim to be aggrieved by the mandatory directions
issued vide order dated 11th August, 2025. They
sought the intervention of Hon’ble the Chief Justice
of India on the premise that the said directions are in
conflict with the mandate of the ABC Rules and are
also impossible to comply with. One such individual
has filed Writ Petition (Civil) No. 784 of 2025, seeking
a direction that the status quo should be maintained
during the pendency of the said writ petition.
10. Under the directions of Hon’ble the Chief
Justice of India, all these matters have been clubbed
and listed before the three-Judge Bench to consider
the prayer for staying the mandatory directions
passed by this Court vide order dated 11th August,
2025 and to deal with the concerns which have been
raised by animal lovers and to test the feasibility of
implementation of the aforesaid directions in
practice.
11. It has been vehemently and fervently urged ‘Una
Voce’ by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the self-acclaimed animal lovers and the NGOs
6
(applicants before this Court), that the direction not
to release the stray dogs to the original locations from
where they would be picked up, after their
sterilisation and immunisation, is in clear violation of
Rule 11(19) of the ABC Rules framed under the
provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
Act, 1960. It was submitted that, under the said Rule,
the concerned authorities are mandated to sterilise
and immunise the stray dogs and to release them in
the same area from which they were picked up.
12. It was further submitted that under the garb of
order dated 11th August, 2025, the municipal
authorities have already started rounding up the
stray dogs. Not only this, the animal lovers, who feed
the stray dogs, are being harassed and threatened
with prosecution.
13. It was strenuously submitted that the direction
to initiate contempt proceedings against the animal
lovers amounts to a direct encroachment upon the
Fundamental Right to Freedom of Expression
guaranteed to the citizens under Article 19 of the
Constitution of India.
7
14. It was further submitted that there is an
imminent risk that the stray dogs who are being
picked up in compliance with this Court’s order may
be culled because the municipal authorities are not
seized of the logistic capability and wherewithal to
create the large number of dog shelters/pounds,
which would be required to cater lakhs of stray dogs
estimated to be present on the streets of New Delhi
and NCR region. Since the municipal authorities do
not have the required capacity, there is a looming
possibility that the stray dogs, after being picked up,
would be eliminated so as to show compliance of the
order dated 11th August, 2025. It was also submitted
that almost 700 stray dogs have already been picked
up, and there is no information as to the fate of the
said stray dogs. They apprehend that a large
population of stray dogs, which might also include
newborn puppies, is likely to be affected and may lose
their lives if the directions given by this Court are not
stayed.
15. Per contra, Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor
General of India, appearing for the GNCTD urged that
the municipal authorities and the State authorities
8
are taking all measures to curb the instances of dog
bites and to vaccinate the rabies infected dogs but the
task is herculean and almost impossible considering
the huge population of stray dogs on the streets of
Delhi and NCR region. However, Shri Mehta urged
that GNCTD is keen to comply with the order dated
11th August, 2025, so that the threat faced by the
human population from the rabid and aggressive
stray dog population on the streets can be addressed.
16. Shri Mehta referred to certain newspaper
reports which estimate that approximately 37,15,713
dog bites occurred in India in 2024, and in several
cases, human lives were lost due to trauma and
rabies infection. The reports mention that the
presence of aggressive stray dogs on streets is
causing grave risk to the lives of children and elderly
people, as well as other vulnerable sections of society.
They are unable to access streets and parks because
of the fear of being attacked and bitten by the rabies-
infected stray dogs.
17. Learned Solicitor General, further submitted
that sterilisation alone is insufficient, as it can
neither prevent attacks from stray dogs nor can it
9
prevent the rabies infection by dog bites because the
immunised dogs with aggressive behaviour would
still be capable of attacking and causing severe harm
to the vulnerable citizens, if these animals are
allowed to remain on the streets. He further
submitted that the directions given by this Court in
Suo Moto Writ Petition do not impinge upon the
statutory framework but rather operate as interim
measures essentially required to protect the Right to
Life of the citizens guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.
18. Shri Mehta submitted that, for the time being,
and till the population of stray dogs on the streets is
brought under control, the directions issued by this
Court vide order dated 11th August 2025, should be
allowed to remain in force. Tapering down of these
measures can be considered once the statistics
pertaining to the procedure of sterilisation and
immunisation undertaken in compliance with the
mandatory directions are placed on record and the
situation improves.
10
19. We have given our thoughtful consideration to
the submissions advanced at Bar and have gone
through the order dated 11th August, 2025.
20. Let notice be issued in Writ Petition (Civil) No.
784 of 2025 and Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.
17623 of 2025.
21. We shall now proceed to consider as to whether
the directions given by a two-Judge Bench of this
Court on 11th August, 2025 (supra) in the Suo Moto
Writ Petition require any clarification/modification or
whether the authorities concerned including the
Government of NCT of Delhi, the Municipal
Corporation of Delhi, the New Delhi Municipal
Council and the civic bodies of NOIDA, Ghaziabad,
Faridabad and Gurugram should be mandated to
expeditiously comply with the directions contained in
the said order.
22. Suo moto cognizance was taken by the two-
Judge Bench of this Court vide order dated 28th July,
2025 and on the very next listing, i.e., on 11th August,
2025, the mandatory directions (supra) were issued
to the concerned authorities.
11
23. We make it clear that there is not even the
slightest doubt in our minds that the intent behind
the order is salutary inasmuch as it works towards
protecting the citizens at large from the attacks by
the aggressive and rabid stray dogs. However, there
are certain vital factors that call for a balancing
exercise so that the order dated 11th August, 2025,
can be taken to its logical conclusion while keeping
its ambit within the contour of the legal framework,
i.e., the ABC Rules, 2023.
24. The two-Judge Bench in para 12(iii) and 12(iv)
of its order has directed that the stray dogs shall be
captured, sterilised, dewormed, and immunised as
per the ABC Rules, but “they shall in no
circumstance be released back onto the streets.”
There is a further mandate in the order that all the
rounded-up stray dogs shall be kept in the
shelters/pounds without there being any scope for
release.
25. The framework of the ABC Rules, to be specific,
Rule 11(19) clearly provides that once the stray dogs
have been sterilised, inoculated, and dewormed, they
12
have to be released back in the same locality from
which they were picked up.
26. The directions given in paras 12(iii) and 12(iv)
are for ensuring that the same number of stray dogs
does not land back on the streets as were picked up
for sterilisation and immunisation, as this would
literally become a vicious circle.
27. Nonetheless, one cannot be ignorant of the fact
that the mandate to keep all the stray dogs, picked
up from Delhi and the adjoining NCR cities, in the
municipal shelters/pounds would require logistics of
gargantuan proportions including manpower,
shelters/pounds, veterinarians, cages and specially
modified vehicles for transportation of the captured
stray dogs.
28. The provision in Rule 11(19) that the dogs, upon
sterilisation and immunisation, should be relocated
to the same locality from which they have been picked
up, is scientifically carved out inasmuch as it serves
two purposes. Firstly, the same prevents the scope of
overcrowding in the dog shelters/pounds, and
secondly, the picked-up stray dogs after
13
immunisation and sterilisation are relocated to the
same environment where they were living earlier,
which is a compassionate treatment.
29. The aggressive sterilisation would definitely put
a curb on the rapid growth of the stray dog
population, ultimately leading to its reduction.
However, this is possible only in an idealistic
situation, which seems unlikely in the present
scenario.
30. It was argued by some of the counsels appearing
for the animal lovers that the process of sterilisation
and inoculation has worked wonders in many towns
across the country and has significantly brought
down the population of stray dogs. To be specific, it
was pointed out that towns like Dehradun and
Lucknow, which have taken aggressive measures for
sterilisation, etc., as per the ABC Rules, have seen a
steady decline in the population of stray dogs. A
suggestion has also been received that chemical
castration is a safe, painless, and effective mode of
sterilisation.
14
31. Thus, the direction given in the order dated 11th
August, 2025, prohibiting the release of the treated
and vaccinated dogs seems to be too harsh, in our
opinion.
32. It cannot be gainsaid that before any direction
for impounding the entire stray dog population is
given, it would be necessary to have a look at the
existing infrastructure and human resources
available with the municipal bodies. 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.
33. We, therefore, feel that a holistic approach
requires mollification of the directions issued vide
order dated 11th August, 2025. Accordingly, the
directions issued by the two-Judge bench of this
Court are supplemented, modified, and clarified in
the terms indicated below: –
15
a. Municipal authorities shall continue to comply
with the directions contained in paras 12(i) and
12(ii) of the subject order.
b. The directions contained in paras 12(iii) and
12(iv), 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.
It is, 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.
c. The directions contained in para 12(v) shall
remain subject to the directions given by us in
paras (a) and (b).
16
d. 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.
Gantries/notice boards shall be placed near such
designated feeding areas, mentioning that stray
dogs shall only be fed in such areas. 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.
The aforesaid directions are being issued in view
of the reports regarding untoward incidents
caused by unregulated feeding of stray dogs and to
ensure that the practice of feeding dogs on roads
and in public places is eliminated, as the said
practice creates great difficulties for the common
man walking on the streets.
e. Each municipal authority shall create a dedicated
helpline number for reporting incidents of violation
of the above directions. On such a report being17
received, appropriate measures shall be taken
against the individuals/NGOs concerned.
f. The direction given in para 13 of the order dated
11th August 2025, is reiterated with a slight
modification 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.
g. Each individual dog lover and each NGO that has
approached this Court shall deposit a sum of
Rs.25,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/-, respectively, with
the Registry of this Court within a period of 7 days,
failing which they shall not be allowed to appear in
the matter any further. 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.
h. 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 the18
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.
i. The municipal authorities shall file an affidavit of
compliance with complete statistics of resources,
viz., dog pounds, veterinarians, dog catching
personnel, specially modified vehicles/cages
available as on date for the purpose of compliance
of the ABC Rules.
34. Since the application of the ABC Rules is
uniform all over the country and the same issues
which have been taken up in the Suo Moto Writ
Petition have either cropped up or are likely to exist
in every State, we propose to expand the scope of this
matter beyond the confines of New Delhi and the NCR
region.
35. For this purpose, we hereby direct the
impleadment of all States and Union Territories in
this matter through the Secretaries concerned of the
Animal Husbandry Department, Secretaries of the
local bodies (Municipal Corporation, Municipal
Councils, Municipalities, etc.) and the
19
Administrators of the Union Territories so as to seek
information from each authority regarding the steps
being taken for compliance of the ABC Rules in their
respective jurisdictions.
36. We are also informed that numerous writ
petitions/suo moto petitions are pending in various
High Courts, more or less dealing with common
issues. Hence, the Registry shall seek information
about such pending writ petitions from the Registrar
Generals of all the High Courts, and thereafter, these
writ petitions shall stand transferred to this Court for
analogous consideration along with the main matter.
37. List the matters after eight weeks for further
directions and for receiving the compliance report.
…………………….…J.
(VIKRAM NATH)
……………………….J.
(SANDEEP MEHTA)
……………………….J.
(N. V. ANJARIA)
NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 22, 2025.
20
[ad_2]
Source link