Activists raise concerns over SC ruling allowing euthanasia of dangerous stray dogs

The provision allowing euthanasia of aggressive or dangerous dogs could become a tool for mass culling, activist argued.

Bengaluru: In a far-reaching judgment aimed at curbing rising stray dog attacks across the country, the Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed authorities to euthanise rabid, incurably ill, or dangerous and aggressive dogs to protect human life and safety.

The ruling triggered sharp reactions among animal welfare activists and civic voices in the city, many of whom raised concerns about possible misuse of the directive and the lack of safeguards on the ground.

City-based animal activist Sukanya Sinha said the provision allowing euthanasia of aggressive or dangerous dogs could become a tool for mass culling.

"I am deeply distressed and fear that this order will be extensively misused on the ground,” Sukanya said. “It feels overwhelming because this is not going to solve the problem. In fact, there is a beautiful sense of coexistence in many institutional areas, like the college campus I am currently in.”

Echoing similar concerns, Chaithra, a volunteer with a city-based animal rescue group, questioned whether civic personnel were equipped to assess animal behaviour.

"Municipal catchers are not behavioural experts. Any dog that barks out of fear or defends its litter will now be labelled as dangerous and put down just to clear the streets. This completely undermines the spirit of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act,” she said.

Sahana Charan, another animal activist who volunteers with the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) to feed stray dogs, said the chances of misuse were high.

"I just hope the authorities use caution in using their judgment. When the authorities haven't been able to find a proper shelter for the animals, what is the guarantee that they will be able to protect them?” she said.

'Decades of neglect'

Srikanth Narasimhan, founder of the Bengaluru NavaNirmana Party (BNP), criticised the Apex Court's approach, calling it a reactive measure that overlooks decades of municipal neglect.

"I do not agree with the Supreme Court order at all,” Narasimhan said. “Problems like these are because of the gross inaction and systemic failure, which has been thrust upon us by the municipal bodies over decades, and it cannot be undone overnight. Hence, the ruling is fundamentally flawed.”

He also raised concerns about the logistics of relocating sterilised stray dogs.

"If animals have to be relocated after sterilisation, there are probably lakhs of dogs that will have to be taken into consideration. How and where are they going to be relocated? The real solution lies in the proper implementation of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) programme, setting up ward-level animal shelters manned by local pet lovers and area sabhas, and allocating a dedicated budget for them,” Narasimhan added.