Supreme Court Addresses Rising Stray Animal Incidents: A Call for Action
Supreme Court Highlights Stray Animal Dangers
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has raised concerns regarding the increasing number of accidents caused by stray animals, emphasizing that fatalities are not solely due to dog bites but also due to incidents involving these animals on the roads.
During a session led by Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and N V Anjaria, the court reviewed requests for changes to its previous rulings, prompted by claims from animal advocates and dog lovers who felt unheard during the initial decision-making process.
The bench stated, "Roads must be free of stray dogs and other animals. The presence of these animals poses a significant risk, leading to accidents. It's unpredictable how a dog may behave at any given moment. Civic authorities must enforce regulations and guidelines rigorously."
Justice Mehta highlighted that two judges from the Rajasthan High Court had recently been involved in accidents, with one still suffering from serious spinal injuries.
"This is a critical issue," he remarked to the attorneys present.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing those seeking modifications to the court's earlier ruling, argued that the solution lies not in capturing all stray dogs but in adopting a scientifically-backed approach to mitigate human-animal conflicts.
He proposed the CSVR method (Capture, Sterilize, Vaccinate, and Release) as an effective strategy for managing stray dog populations, which could ultimately decrease dog bite incidents.
"Prevention is always preferable to treatment," Justice Nath noted, clarifying that the court's directive was merely to remove stray dogs from specific areas without altering existing regulations.
The bench emphasized the need for strict adherence to rules and procedures by state and municipal authorities.
"Some states have failed to comply with our directives, and we will take a firm stance against them. All regulations and procedures must be followed," the court asserted.
When attorneys raised concerns about dog attacks, the bench acknowledged the tragic consequences for both children and adults.
Senior advocate Gaurav Agarwal, appointed as amicus curiae, informed the court that the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) has developed a standard operating procedure to implement the court's orders.
"They have identified 1,400 kilometers of roads as vulnerable areas. However, the NHAI states that it is the responsibility of state governments to address these issues," Agarwal explained.
The bench suggested that fencing could be a viable solution to prevent stray animals from accessing roads and highways.
Agarwal also noted that states like Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, and Punjab have yet to submit compliance affidavits, while others have provided unsatisfactory responses.
Justice Nath indicated that the court would address these non-compliant states.
Sibal argued that the response to the stray dog situation should reflect a mature and responsible society.
"This is not an adversarial issue; we are here as advocates for dogs. Just as we wouldn't eliminate all tigers because one is dangerous, we must ensure sterilization to control the population. There is a process for this," he stated, referencing the success of the CSVR model in reducing the stray dog population in Lucknow.
He cautioned that mixing rabid and non-rabid dogs in shelters could lead to widespread rabies transmission.
In a lighter moment, the bench quipped, "Perhaps we should also consider providing counseling for the dogs to prevent biting when they are released back into the community."
Similar sentiments were echoed by senior advocates Colin Gonsalves, Anand Grover, C U Singh, and various animal rights activists present.
Senior advocate K K Venugopal, representing NALSAR, Hyderabad, also contributed to the discussion, emphasizing the insufficient number of shelters available for stray dogs.
The discussions concluded without resolution and are set to continue on Thursday.
The Supreme Court had previously noted the alarming increase in dog bite incidents in institutional areas such as schools, hospitals, and train stations, leading to a directive on November 7 for the immediate relocation of stray dogs to designated shelters after sterilization and vaccination.
The court mandated that these dogs should not be returned to their original locations post-capture.
Authorities were instructed to remove all stray cattle and animals from highways and expressways.
The recurrence of dog bite incidents in institutional settings highlighted not only administrative negligence but also a systemic failure to protect these areas from avoidable dangers.
This case is part of a suo motu proceeding initiated on July 28 last year, following reports of stray dog bites resulting in rabies, particularly among children in the capital.