Supreme Court Questions Feeding Of Stray Dogs In Public Places

The Supreme Court today questioned the conduct of people and organisations feeding stray dogs in public places, asking whether compassion is limited to animals and not extended to humans. The court raised concerns over accountability, asking who would be responsible if a child were killed in a stray dog attack.

During the hearing, senior advocate Arvind Datar said the Animal Birth Control Rules focus mainly on sterilisation and do not adequately address aggressive dogs or eliminate the risk of attacks. The bench recalled its 8th January hearing, noting poor implementation of the ABC Rules, and clarified that it has never ordered the removal of all street dogs. The court also warned that stray dogs can spread diseases to wildlife, citing cases where infections like canine distemper are transmitted to animals such as tigers.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh urged the court not to frame the issue as humans versus dogs, stressing the need to maintain ecological balance. Meanwhile, senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy said sterilisation is the only effective way to control stray dog populations and blamed regulatory failures for the crisis. The Supreme Court has been hearing the matter as a suo motu case since July last year.(updated on 13th january 2026)