The Supreme Court of India on 7 January heard multiple petitions in an ongoing matter concerning stray dogs and public safety, with specific focus on their presence in institutional spaces such as schools, hospitals, courts and other public facilities.
A three-judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N. V. Anjaria considered whether stray dogs should be allowed within institutional premises. The court examined issues related to public safety, enforcement of existing laws and compliance with its earlier directions.
The hearing follows an order passed on 7 November 2025, in which the Supreme Court directed authorities to remove stray dogs from schools, hospitals, sports complexes, bus stands and railway stations. The court ordered that the dogs be sterilised and vaccinated before being relocated to shelters, and clarified that animals removed from such locations should not be released back into the same areas.
During the hearing, the bench reiterated that institutional premises are not public streets and should be kept free of stray dogs for safety reasons. Justice Vikram Nath observed that it is not possible to predict when a dog might bite, and noted that the presence of stray dogs could also pose accident risks in such premises.
The judges clarified that the court was not framing any new policy, but was monitoring the implementation of existing laws and its earlier directions. When counsel representing animal welfare groups argued that the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules were not being properly implemented by authorities, the bench questioned whether people should continue to suffer due to administrative failure.
Animal welfare advocates maintained that strict implementation of the ABC Rules, which mandate sterilisation, vaccination and release of dogs back into the same area, could help control stray dog populations and reduce safety concerns.
Other parties, including victims and counsel representing public safety interests, argued that enforcement of the ABC Rules has been inadequate and has not resulted in a reduction in dog bite incidents or safety risks. One applicant informed the court that thousands of people are bitten by stray dogs annually, stressing that public safety must also be considered.
The Supreme Court indicated that the matter remains under consideration and that it will continue to monitor compliance with its earlier orders. Further arguments are expected before any final directions are passed.
