The Supreme Court on Wednesday came down heavily on state governments for failing to comply with its directions to control the stray dog population. Expressing frustration, a bench led by Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N V Anjaria said states were indulging in “storytelling” rather than taking concrete action, warning of strictures for vague affidavits and lack of data on dog bites and sterilisation efforts.
The apex court resumed its suo motu hearing on the growing menace of stray dog attacks, triggered by alarming reports of rabies deaths and bites, particularly among children. It noted with dismay that state governments had not followed through on its November 7, 2025, directions regarding sterilisation, animal birth control (ABC), fencing of public buildings, and relocation of stray dogs.
“They are all building castles in the air,” the bench remarked, adding that many states were only making “vague averments” on paper while little had been done on the ground.
Amicus curiae Gaurav Agarwal briefed the court on the compliance status across states. He highlighted some steps by states like Bihar but also pointed out glaring shortcomings, such as insufficient sterilisation numbers and lack of clarity in official affidavits.
Taking Assam as an example, the court expressed shock at the staggering dog bite data. “In 2024, there were 1.66 lakh bites. And in 2025, only in January, there were 20,900. This is shocking,” the bench observed.
The Bihar government claimed to have sterilised 20,648 dogs through its 34 ABC centres, but the court pointed out that this figure was grossly insufficient compared to the estimated stray dog population of over six lakh. It also questioned the absence of data on dog pounds and fencing of institutional areas.
While Bihar’s counsel insisted that progress would be visible in three months, the bench warned that states could not evade responsibility with vague claims.
Justice Vikram Nath warned that states making ambiguous or unverified claims would face “strong strictures.” The bench also emphasised that public buildings like schools and hospitals must be properly fenced, not just to prevent stray dog intrusion, but also to protect property from theft.
The court also heard compliance updates from Goa, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Jharkhand, and Gujarat, all of which drew criticism for inadequate implementation. The amicus is expected to submit compliance summaries for Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, and Telangana in the next hearing.
On November 7, 2025, the Supreme Court had directed that stray dogs be sterilised, vaccinated, and relocated to shelters, with a bar on returning them to their original locations. It also mandated the removal of stray cattle and dogs from highways and institutional areas.
The suo motu case, initiated in July 2025, stems from a news report highlighting a surge in stray dog bites leading to rabies deaths in Delhi. The court had earlier warned states of “heavy compensation” for bite incidents and held that dog feeders could also be held accountable.
In a related development, the Court recently issued strong observations against former Union Minister Maneka Gandhi for making public statements critical of its orders, holding that she may have committed contempt of court.
The matter will be heard again on Thursday, with further submissions expected from other states.
