No One Can Predict When it Might Attack: Supreme Court on Stray Dog
Supreme Court questions presence of stray dogs in schools, hospitals, Courts and transport hubs, criticizes civic bodies for failing to enforce ABC Rules.
Jan 8, 2026 - The Supreme Court on Wednesday (January 7) made strong observations while hearing petitions related to stray dog attacks and primarily examining the matter of strays in institutional premises. When senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing dog lovers, claimed that stray dogs do not attack people, the Court remarked that no one can predict a dog’s mood or when it might attack.
A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice NV Anjaria questioned why stray dogs should be allowed in sensitive public spaces such as schools, hospitals, court premises, bus stands, railway stations and sports complexes?
"Should people suffer because of the authorities' failure to comply with the ABC rules?" the Court asked, emphasising that removing dogs from such places should not face any objection, noting that prevention is better than cure.
The Bench strongly criticised civic bodies and local authorities for failing to implement the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules and said that negligence has aggravated the problem. Justice Nath categorically said that removing stray dogs from sensitive public places is essential.
"The roads have to be clear and clean of dogs. They might not bite, but they still cause accidents. Why do we need dogs on streets, schools, and institutional areas?" the Bench said.
The hearing involved a batch of petitions filed by victims of stray dog attacks, animal welfare organisations and the Central government. The Court referred to its November 2025 order directing the removal of stray dogs from educational institutions, hospitals and transport hubs and their relocation to shelters.
Senior advocate Anand Grover, appearing for dog lovers, said the situation has worsened owing to the authorities’ failure to strictly enforce the ABC Rules. Advocate Sibal argued that isolated incidents cannot justify removing all dogs from an entire area. When he suggested capturing aggressive dogs, sterilising them and releasing them, Justice Mehta sarcastically remarked that the only thing left would be to advise dogs not to bite humans.
Advocate Vandana Jain, representing the petitioners, said they are not against dogs but stressed that public safety must take precedence.
The Bench continues to hear petitions on Thursday (January 8).
Source: Media Reports
#SupremeCourt #StrayDogs #DogMenace #PublicSafety #ABC_Rules #AnimalWelfare #DogAttacks #IndiaNews #LegalNews #CivicBodies #RajasthanNews #UdaipurNews
To join us on Facebook Click Here and Subscribe to UdaipurTimes Broadcast channels on GoogleNews | Telegram | Signal