Back in August, a two-judge bench expressed concern regarding the increasing incidents of dog bites and rabies in the region, highlighting the city's estimated one million stray dogs. The Supreme Court had previously ordered authorities to round up the strays and confine them to shelters, a decision that contradicted the established protocols that require vaccinated and sterilized strays to be returned to their capture sites.
This initial ruling sparked significant backlash, with animal rights advocates arguing for more humane solutions. In light of the protests, the court convened a three-judge panel to reconsider the case, ultimately deciding that non-aggressive and non-infected dogs can be returned to their capture area post-vaccination and neutering.
Moreover, the court has prohibited the feeding of stray dogs in public and warned animal welfare groups not to disrupt its decisions, while also allowing passionate citizens to adopt strays through municipal channels, provided those dogs do not return to public spaces. The Supreme Court plans to create a comprehensive national policy addressing stray dog management, keeping in mind similar ongoing cases in various states.
This initial ruling sparked significant backlash, with animal rights advocates arguing for more humane solutions. In light of the protests, the court convened a three-judge panel to reconsider the case, ultimately deciding that non-aggressive and non-infected dogs can be returned to their capture area post-vaccination and neutering.
Moreover, the court has prohibited the feeding of stray dogs in public and warned animal welfare groups not to disrupt its decisions, while also allowing passionate citizens to adopt strays through municipal channels, provided those dogs do not return to public spaces. The Supreme Court plans to create a comprehensive national policy addressing stray dog management, keeping in mind similar ongoing cases in various states.
