Supreme Court Directs Compensation Mechanism for Accidents Involving Stray Animals

The Supreme Court has raised alarms over accidents caused by stray animals, directing the government to create a compensation system for victims. The court emphasized the need for accountability among animal owners and mandated that animals return to their shelters daily. This ruling arose from a case where a woman's husband was killed by a stray bull, leading her to seek compensation. The court's decision highlights the importance of animal tagging for better monitoring and health care, aiming to prevent future incidents and ensure justice for victims.

By Narendra Chaudhary Jul 31, 2026, 19:14 IST

Supreme Court's Directive on Stray Animal Accidents

Expressing concern over accidents caused by stray animals on roads, the Supreme Court instructed both the central and state governments on Friday to establish a compensation mechanism for such incidents. The bench, comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh, issued several directives emphasizing that owners of these animals should be held accountable and that measures must be taken to ensure that animals return to their designated shelters by the end of each day.

The bench stated, “All states that have enacted laws concerning livestock must take immediate steps to ensure strict compliance and implementation.”

To facilitate compensation payments for accidents involving both pedestrians and drivers, necessary amendments can be made or rules deemed appropriate by the competent authority can be included.” The apex court mandated the tagging of all animals, which would enhance their monitoring, ensure long-term health care, and facilitate veterinary checks and vaccinations. This directive came during the hearing of an appeal filed by a woman challenging a ruling from the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had annulled her compensation of ₹29.32 lakh.

The woman's husband was fatally injured when he was struck by a stray bull while walking on the road. Following his death, she petitioned the high court for adequate compensation. A single-judge bench had assessed the compensation based on the deceased's income, age, and other relevant factors under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and ordered the payment of compensation.

However, the division bench overturned the order of the single-judge bench.