Supreme Court Issues New Directives for Stray Dog Management Across India

The Bench pointed out that the ABC framework's implementation has been inconsistent, inadequately funded, and poorly executed since its inception in 2001. The Court observed that sterilization and vaccination efforts were lacking in planning and continuity, undermining public health initiatives and effective population control. It noted that States and UTs had not developed necessary infrastructure to keep pace with the growing stray dog population. The Bench stated, “Had authorities acted with due diligence and foresight, the situation would not have reached such alarming proportions.”

Reports highlighted a troubling number of dog bites, with 1,084 incidents occurring in just one month in Sri Ganganagar district, Rajasthan, resulting in severe injuries, particularly among children. The Court took note of various attacks, including an incident involving a German traveler in Surat. It stressed that the danger presented is not merely statistical, commenting, “The harm is unfathomable,” and warned that failure to comply with its directives would lead to contempt proceedings and potential liability for States and officials.

The Court affirmed that the right to life under Article 21 encompasses the right to move freely in public spaces without fear of physical harm or life-threatening incidents like dog bites. It emphasized that the state must not be a passive observer when human life is threatened despite existing laws.

In its directives, the Court mandated:

- States and UTs must take decisive, coordinated action to improve infrastructure under the ABC framework, including establishing at least one fully functional ABC center in each district, equipped with trained personnel and surgical facilities.

- The number of ABC centers should be increased based on district population density and area size.

- Authorities are to implement the Court's and AWBI Rules unconditionally and without delay.

- Local authorities should assess public safety concerns to determine the applicability of the Court’s measures in high-traffic areas.

- Comprehensive measures to bolster veterinary services, shelter facilities, vaccination programs, and availability of anti-rabies vaccines in government healthcare facilities must be undertaken.

- The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) was tasked to devise a prompt mechanism to manage stray animals on roads and highways, including relocation and shelter measures.

- While authorities may resort to legally permissible measures such as euthanasia of incurably ill or dangerous dogs in areas with high instances of aggressive attacks, they were granted protection for actions taken in good faith while executing these orders.

The Court specified that no criminal charges should be filed against officials acting in good faith unless gross misconduct is evident. Furthermore, High Courts were directed to monitor compliance through suo motu continuing mandamus proceedings, allowing them to adjust directives as necessary without compromising the essence of the judgment. Jurisdictional courts were authorized to initiate contempt measures against officials who fail to comply with these directives.