NGO Moves Supreme Court Against 'Indiscriminate Culling Of Stray Dogs', Says SC Direction Being Misunderstood

An NGO has moved the Supreme Court seeking clarification that its recent direction permitting euthanasia of dogs in certain circumstances cannot be construed as a mandate for indiscriminate culling of stray dogs.

The application has been filed by NGO Animals Are People Too in the pending proceedings before the Supreme Court, expressing concern that the Court's direction is being misinterpreted by authorities to justify unlawful killing or removal of dogs.

Referring to public statements made by Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann to "eliminate stray dogs" and media reports concerning the removal of dogs from Khalsa College, the applicant has contended that the Supreme Court's order is being misunderstood and implemented in a manner contrary to law.

The NGO has sought an express clarification from the Court that euthanasia of dogs can be carried out only in narrowly defined circumstances and strictly in accordance with the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, after due verification by qualified experts. The Court's earlier direction was never intended to authorise blanket culling of stray dogs or extrajudicial killing through poisoning or other means.

The plea also seeks directions to all State Directors General of Police to ensure that no dogs are unlawfully killed, poisoned, or otherwise harmed in the name of implementing the Court's order.

The applicant has argued that the statutory framework under the ABC Rules, 2023 permits euthanasia only in limited cases, subject to prescribed safeguards, and that any deviation from this framework would be illegal.

The NGO has stated that the definition of "aggressive dog" has not been clearly defined in the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, and it may lead to a situation where ordinary stray dogs may be arbitarily be labelled as "aggressive" by local authorities, leading to unlawful killings.

It has therefore been sought that the Court may clarify that no dog may be declared as "aggressive" except upon examination and recommendation by a duly constituted Committee consisting of a qualified government veterinary doctor, a representative of a recognised Animal Welfare Organisation/NGO and a representative from the concerned local authority.

In its recent order on May 19, the Supreme Court allowed the use of euthanasia for rabid, incurably ill and demonstrably dangerous/aggressive dogs in as per strict statutory protocol.

The Court ordered :

"In areas where the population of stray dogs has assumed alarming proportions and where incidents of dog bites or aggressive attacks have become frequent and pose a continuing threat to public safety, the concerned authorities may, subject to due assessment by qualified veterinary experts and strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, the Animal Birth Control Rules 2023 and other applicable statutory protocols, take such measures as may be legally permissible, including euthanasia, in cases involving rabid, incurably ill, or demonstrably dangerous/aggressive dogs so as to effectively curb the threat posed to human life and safety."

The directions were passed by a bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjaria in the suo moto case taken on the issue of stray dogs. The bench remarked that there are "deeply disturbing" reports of dog bite cases, especially against children and older people. It refused to modify its earlier directions passed last November to the authorities to remove stray dogs from various public places.

Last year, it had passed directions banning the feeding of dogs in streets, except in designated feeding spots.

The application of 'Animals are People Too' has been drawn by Advocate Supantha Sinha & filed by Adv Aditya Jain.