Supreme Court modifies Delhi stray dogs order: ‘Catch, sterlise and release in same locality’

The Supreme Court revised its previous order on stray dogs on Friday, ruling that the concerned authorities are now required to release them back to where they were picked up after immunisation and sterilisation.

The previous order of August 11 had instructed municipal officials to round up all stray dogs of Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR), prohibiting their release from shelters.

“Prohibition on release of strays shall be stayed. They shall be dewormed, vaccinated etc and sent back to the same area,” a three-judge bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and NV Anjaria said.

The court, however, said that dogs with aggressive behaviour or with rabies shall not be released from shelters.

‘Public feeding not allowed’

The bench also stipulated that public feeding of stray dogs would not be allowed. “No public feeding of dogs allowed. Dedicated feeding spaces of stray dogs to be created. There have been instances due to such feeding instances.”

The apex court has also expanded the scope of the directive to the entire country, impleading all states and Union Territories. Earlier, the matter was limited to Delhi-NCR.

What was the controversy?

On August 11, a Bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan directed Delhi’s municipal authorities to begin rounding up stray dogs across all areas, with priority given to vulnerable localities. The court ordered the establishment of shelters capable of housing at least 5,000 dogs within eight weeks.

The directive prohibited the release of dogs back onto the streets and mandated that all captured animals undergo sterilisation, immunisation, and de-worming. Shelters must also be equipped with CCTV surveillance, sufficient staff, proper food, and medical care.

Additionally, the court instructed the authorities to launch a helpline within a week for reporting dog bites, ensure the capture of offending dogs within four hours of any complaint, and publish monthly data on rabies vaccinations and treatments. The order warned that any interference with the implementation of these measures would be treated as contempt of court.