‘Systemic Failure’: Key Takeaways From SC Hearing On Street Dogs

The Supreme Court on Wednesday resumed its hearing on the ongoing case concerning stray dogs, a matter it took up on its own to address rising safety concerns across India. The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N. V. Anjaria, heard multiple arguments and observations from different parties during the session.

The case aims to find a balanced solution between public safety and animal rights, as the country continues to grapple with the growing population of stray dogs and increasing reports of dog bite incidents.

During its last major hearing on November 7, 2025, the Supreme Court had directed state governments and the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to ensure the removal of stray dogs from highways and sensitive public places. It had also asked all educational and healthcare institutions - both government and private - to put up fences within eight weeks to prevent dog attacks.

Supreme Court's Key Observations

1. During Wednesday's hearing, the bench made several important remarks. The judges noted that it is impossible to predict how a dog will behave or know whether it is "in a mood to bite."

2. Stressing the importance of prevention, the court said that when it comes to public safety, it is always better to act early rather than after an incident occurs.

3. The court also pointed out that only about ten states have filed reports showing compliance with its earlier orders, calling this a sign of poor coordination and lack of urgency. It described the situation as a "systemic failure" in ensuring the safety of public spaces such as schools, hospitals, and railway stations. The court emphasized that stray dogs must be removed from these areas and not returned after capture.

4. Senior Advocate K. K. Venugopal informed the court that India has nearly 5.25 crore stray dogs, estimating that it would take over 77,000 shelters to house them all, with feeding costs alone reaching ₹62 crore per day. This, he said, highlights the enormous scale of the challenge.

5. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that there should be a clear distinction between "community dogs" living in institutional areas and stray dogs found elsewhere. He urged that community dogs should be handled under the existing Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules rather than being permanently removed.

6. Meanwhile, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing several NGOs, said that official dog-bite figures were often exaggerated, as authorities sometimes count multiple rabies shots for a single incident as separate cases.

7. The Supreme Court also asked the NHAI to explain how it plans to address the issue of stray animals, including dogs and cattle, on highways, which have caused several accidents.

8. The hearing ended around 1 p.m. and will continue on Thursday, December 8, when the bench is expected to review compliance updates and discuss long-term solutions for managing stray animals in India.