In a significant constitutional and administrative determination, the Supreme Court of India on Tuesday ruled that the fundamental right to live with dignity encompasses the right to live freely without the threat of harm from dog bites.
A three-judge bench of the apex court dismissed a batch of petitions and applications that sought to recall its earlier directions regarding the relocation and sterilization of stray dogs. In doing so, the court also upheld the validity of the standard operating procedures (SOPs) designed by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) to manage stray animals, while issuing mandatory directives to States and Union Territories to urgently build up infrastructure to combat the growing menace.
Background of the Case
The legal proceedings originated from a suo motu case initiated by the Supreme Court on July 28 last year. The apex court took cognizance of the issue following a media report highlighting a surge in stray dog bites leading to rabies, particularly among children, in the national capital.
This case led to a landmark order on November 7 of last year, in which the Supreme Court addressed what it termed an “alarming rise” in dog-bite incidents within institutional areas—including hospitals, educational institutions, and railway stations. Under the November 7 order, the court directed the immediate relocation of stray canines from these institutional zones to designated shelters after they underwent mandatory sterilization and vaccination. Crucially, the court ruled that stray dogs picked up from these areas must not be released back to their original locations. Additionally, the November 7 order directed authorities to ensure the complete removal of cattle and other stray animals from state highways, national highways, and expressways.
Subsequently, various parties approached the court with applications and petitions seeking a modification or total recall of the November 7 directions. These pleas, alongside separate petitions challenging the validity of the AWBI’s standard operating procedures for dealing with stray animals, were compiled for a comprehensive hearing.
On January 29, the Supreme Court reserved its verdict on this batch of petitions. During those hearings, the bench openly expressed its dissatisfaction with the compliance and implementation efforts of several states, specifically pointing to Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and Tamil Nadu.
The Court’s Analysis and Observations
In delivering its judgment on Tuesday, the bench focused on balancing animal welfare frameworks with the fundamental safety of citizens. The court underscored that the state’s failure to manage stray animals directly impacts the constitutional right to a dignified life.
“The right to live with dignity encompasses the right to live freely without threat of harm from dog bites,” the bench observed, adding that the judiciary “cannot remain oblivious to harsh ground realities where children, international travellers and elderly have fallen victim to dog bite incidents.”
The court turned a critical eye toward local governments and statutory bodies, pointing out a systemic failure to execute animal population control policies. The bench observed a “discernible absence” of sustained, systemic, and incremental efforts on the part of States and Union Territories to construct the necessary infrastructure to manage the rising stray dog population.
Furthermore, the judges remarked that the implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) framework “largely remains sporadic, underfunded and uneven across jurisdictions,” leaving the public vulnerable to safety hazards.
The Decision and Directives
Refusing to walk back its previous mandates, the Supreme Court dismissed all applications and petitions seeking to recall or modify the November 7 directions on relocation and sterilization. The bench also dismissed the challenges raised against the validity of the AWBI’s standard operating procedures, effectively confirming their legitimacy as a framework for managing stray animals.
To address the infrastructure deficits identified during the hearings, the Supreme Court issued a series of directives to States, Union Territories, and other statutory bodies. The authorities have been ordered to undertake immediate, coordinated efforts to augment their infrastructure to handle the stray dog menace effectively and ensure public safety across all jurisdictions.
