The Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. was considering a suo motu petition instituted to comply with the Apex Court's directions in In Re : City Hounded By Strays, Kids Pay Price v State of Andhra Pradesh.

The Court took note of a memo filed by the Government Pleader along with monthly compliance reports prepared by the High-Level Monitoring Committee for August and September 2026, pursuant to the Court's earlier directions.

The reports were prepared in a modified format pursuant to the Court's order dated September 16, 2026, to assess compliance with the Supreme Court's directions, as reflected in the government circular dated July 31, 2026. The Court clarified that the modified format was intended to ensure that the basic requirements prescribed by the Supreme Court were first implemented across local self-government institutions before examining compliance with other incidental directions.

The report, prepared by the Principal Director, indicated that although most local bodies had substantially complied with the requirements, implementation of the remaining directions was not uniform. Several local bodies reportedly stated that they had been unable to identify suitable land for establishing shelters for stray dogs.

Another difficulty cited in the reports was public opposition to the establishment of shelters, even in cases where suitable land had already been identified.

Taking note of the difficulties associated with the availability of land in the State, the Court observed that local self-government institutions could explore the establishment of common shelters serving two or three panchayats, thereby addressing the requirements of multiple local bodies.

The Court, however, made it clear that public opposition could not be accepted as a justification for failing to implement the directions issued by the Supreme Court. It cautioned that local self-government institutions would have to face the consequences, including possible contempt proceedings before the Supreme Court, if they failed to comply with the binding directions.

The Court also considered a submission made by Advocate Maitreyi, appearing for an animal rescue centre in Kochi, who pointed out that there were instances in which stray dogs picked up from public institutions and subjected to the Animal Birth Control (ABC) procedure had not been released from shelters in accordance with the applicable directions.

It was pointed out that this is against the mandate of the direction issued by the Supreme Court, which stated that animals picked from within the public premises should not be released back within those premises. But, there is no interdiction in the release of those animals outside the premises of the public institution.

The Court clarified that dogs picked up from public premises and subjected to the prescribed ABC procedure must be released in accordance with the Supreme Court's directions and should not be continuously kept in shelters contrary to those directions.

The standing counsel for the Kochi Corporation undertook to furnish territorial details concerning dogs subjected to the ABC procedure, including information on whether the dogs had subsequently been released.

The Court also sought clarity regarding the manner in which the ABC procedure was being carried out, in view of concerns raised and doubts expressed about its implementation. The Corporation's report is expected to address these issues and provide the relevant particulars to assist the Court in monitoring compliance.

To assist the Court in supervising and monitoring the implementation of the directions across local self-government institutions, the High Court appointed Shruthi Bhat and Pooja Omanakuttan as amici curiae.

The Court has directed them to submit periodic reports on matters observed during their visits to various locations in the State, particularly concerning the treatment of stray animals.

The Registry was also directed to prepare a report based on the compliance reports submitted by the Government concerning the implementation of the Supreme Court's directions by the various local self-government institutions.

The consolidated report is to be prepared for submission before the Supreme Court by November 6, 2026.