A Paw on the Constitution: Delhi’s Stray Dogs and the Struggle for Rights

By Aratrika Naithani

Introduction

‘History repeats itself’, and it did on the evening of 11th August 2025, with few changes- geographical location, year and set of people. On 6th July 1832 Bombay current day Mumbai saw 200 Parsi gather to protest against the re-enforcement of the cruel law passed by the Britishers in 1813 which allowed people to kill the dogs and each dog killed shall be rewarded by 8 annas, as the population of the dogs were increasing in the city. The protest was later joined in by Hindus, Muslims and Jains which resulted in complete estoppel of business, as the protesters refused to continue any form of business as a means of depicting the dissent. The Paris led protest forced the State to repeal the law. [1]

Paris does not merely consider dogs as their companions but dogs hold a very important position in Paris religion, dogs are considered gatekeepers of heavens. Dogs are a part of a funeral ritual called sagdid or the dog sight, a dog would refuse to look into the eyes of the deceased if they are really dead.

Background

The Court on the start of the week last week of July decided to take suo moto cognizance based out of a Times of India article, ‘Cities hounded by the strays, kids pay the price’, the article told devastating tale of Chavi Sharma age 6 years who recently started attending school. [2]

Chavi Sharma was brutally attacked by a stray dog infested with rabies, leaving deep wounds in her left leg, arm and palm. She was then rescued by the bystanders and rushed to the hospital where she received her first dose of anti-rabies vaccination. Chavi after a few days developed a fever which was dismissed as seasonal flu by the attending doctor. Eventually she refused to consume water and was brought to various government hospitals where she was denied treatment due to numerous reasons like lack of isolation ward. At last, she was admitted in a private hospital in Pritampura, she died the next day, before she could get her third dose of vaccination. There were continuance complaints made by the neighbours about the dog, as it has been chasing vehicles and biting people, yet action was taken by MCD.

There were a total of 5 government hospitals which refused to admit Chavi and the doctor who was originally looking after her dismissed her mother’s cry for her, stating the deteriorating health as seasonal flu. MCD even upon receiving various complaints failed to capture the dog.[3]

Order Against Sentiment

On 11th August 2025, a two-judge bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan delivered directions that sent ripples across the National Capital Territory (NCT). The Court ordered that stray dogs across all localities must be picked up and confined in State-run animal shelters, with no release permitted even after vaccination or sterilisation. To ensure strict compliance, the judges mandated CCTV surveillance in detention centers and warned that if any dog was released back into society, stern action would follow against the responsible authorities.[4] A helpline, they said, must be established to record dog-bite complaints, and within four hours of such a report, the concerned dog must be captured. The Court made it clear that emotional sentiments could not dictate this process.

When Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra attempted to intervene, the bench brusquely rejected his application, reiterating that sentiments and emotions had no place in such litigation. The Amicus Curiae, after consulting animal rights activists, suggested that detained dogs could be rehabilitated through adoption. Yet the Court dismissed this possibility, asserting that stray dogs could not overnight transform into household pets. In its view, releasing or rehoming them would render the entire exercise futile, and any resistance, whether from organisations or individuals, would invite penal consequences.

ABC Rules, 2023 and Prevention of Cruelty on Animal Act. 1960

Under Prevention to Cruelty on Animal Act, 1960 the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023 was framed which aimed to deal with the problem of strays without cruelty. Under the ABC Rules the principle of CVNR is said to be followed, that is, Capture, vaccinate(anti-rabies), Neuter (sterilize), Release. The ABC Rules, 2023 is beyond merely CVNR as it has a controlled mechanism for a systematic and cruelty-free means of catering to the problem at hand. It has provisions related to infrastructure, control and monitoring committee, record keeping and conflict resolution teams.

The current directions laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court violate various provisions of ABC Rules, 2023 and The Prevention of Animal Cruelty Act, 1960. Under Rule 11 mandates that the strays captured must be released back to the same locality from where they were picked and captured. Whereas the direction clearly states that stray dogs must be kept in the shelters and if they escaped, the concerned authority would be held liable.

Stray dogs can only be euthanized under two conditions, if the dog is infested with rabies or dog in question is terminally ill.

As renowned Animal Rights Activist, Maneka Sanjay Gandhi stated that Delhi-NCR has around 3 lakhs dogs and the state would need at least 3,000 shelters which would cost the State around 15,000 crore, the land required for building the shelter must be neither inhabited by humans nor agricultural land. She mentioned social conflict that shall come to play between dog catchers and dog feeders in every locality, she drew from the example of Paris.[5]

Removal of stray dogs shall also disrupt the ecological balance as the number of rats would increase.

Stay Order

Hon’ble Chief Justice of India upon receiving several concerns raised by the advocates regarding the directions passed by Two-judge Bench on permanent removal of stray dogs, decided to formulate this matter to a three-judge bench composed of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjari.

On 14th August 2025, a Three judge bench reserved its orderon the interim prayer seeking a stay on the August 11 directive. The bench will take some time to consider all the points made by both the sides. The bench has reserved its final decision; they did not grant an immediate stay on the August 11 order. This tantamount that the civic bodies are still under directions laid down by the two-judge bench and they shall begin the process of rounding up strays, although it is likely being done with caution pending the new bench’s decision.

Modification of an Interim Order/Directive

Hon’ble Supreme Court modified the interim order passed on 11^th August 2025. The Principle of Capture, Vaccinate, Neuter and Released (CVNR) enshrined in the ABC Rule, 2023 has to be followed.

The stray has to be released back in the same locality after getting vaccinated.
Dogs which are aggressive and infested with rabies shall not be released back in the society.
Strict prohibition on feeding the stray on street, the Municipal Authorises have to make sure there must be dedicated feeding spots for the strays.
Option of adoption is now available; the adopter must ensure that the adopted stray must not be left back in the society.
Each individual petitioner and NGO which approached the court must pay a sum of 25,000 and 2 lakhs with the registry of the court, failing to compliance shall tantamount to non-appearance.
The policy to be applied PAN India, notices issued to the secretaries of the Department of Animal Husbandry in all states and union territories, seeking their response on the framing of a national policy to address the stray dog issue.
All petitions filed in various High Court must be transferred to the Supreme Court.

Conclusion

The constitution of India does not explicitly mention Fundamental Rights of animals in India but there are various landmark judgement which marks the existence of fundamental rights of animals. In Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja (2014), the court enlarged the scope of Right to Life expands for animals as well. In The Animal Welfare Board of India & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr. 2023[6], the court upheld the validity of Jallikattu and reserved it’s judgement on the 2014 judgement, anyhow the stand of court remains the same in the question of animal’s fundamental rights.

According to Article 51-A(g) fundamental duty on every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife, and “to have compassion for all living creatures

There is a dire to strike a balance between human and animal life, as two of them together form an ecosystem, any disturbance to balance shall tantamount to imbalance in the ecological disorder. Dogs and humans have been companions of one other for centuries now, there are tales of love between the two sung with pride.

[1] Jesse S. Palsetia, “Mad Dogs and Parsis: The Bombay Dog Riots of 1832,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2001, pp. 13–30[2] SUO MOTO WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)NO.5/2025

[3] “Delhi hounded by strays, kids pay price: Girl (6) dies of rabies after dog attack, family alleges official apathy,” The Times of India, July 28, 2025.

[4] “City Hounded by Strays, Kids Pay Price”, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 798 (Supreme Court, August 11, 2025).

[5] Jatin Anand, Maneka Gandhi: ‘Cannot understand how anybody could take this (SC order on stray dogs) seriously…Appeal to PM to intervene… this is not a sensible thing’, The Indian Express, August 13, 2025

[6] The Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of India, (2023) 9 SCC 322.

Post Views: 67

Opinion